DEFENCE

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if Harrier GR7 and GR9 will be equipped with ASRAAM.

Adam Ingram: ASRAAM will not be fitted to Harrier GR7, nor do we intend to integrate the missile on to the aircraft during the programme to upgrade GR7 to GR9 standard.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress on the Meteor missile programme.

Adam Ingram: A finalised draft contract for the Meteor missile was sent to our partner nations at the end of April. Once approval is obtained from each nation we will be in a position to award the Meteor contract to MBDA. This is currently planned for early July.

Harriers

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what capability will be available in 2006 to replace the withdrawn Sea Harriers; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Royal Navy Task Groups will retain a significant air defence capability after the Sea Harrier is withdrawn from service in 2006, including against sea-skimming missiles, against which Sea Harrier has little capability. This air defence capability will include type 42 anti-air warfare destroyers armed with updated Sea Dart anti-aircraft missiles, type 22 and 23 frigates armed with point defence missile systems (including the enhanced Sea Wolf missile system) and close-in weapon systems. From later this year, the first upgraded airborne early warning Sea King flight will go to sea providing an improved detection capability over land and sea. All task group warships and some support shipping are also equipped with decoy systems against air and surface launched anti-ship missiles. Additionally, the Harrier GR aircraft possess a point defence capability through the sidewinder short range air-to-air missile.

Harriers

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what basis the decision on the timing of the withdrawal of the Sea Harrier was made; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The Sea Harrier FA2 is being withdrawn by 2006 as to retain it as a viable weapon system beyond the middle of this decade would require significant investment and would also involve significant technical risk.
	As the Sea Harrier FA2 is essentially a modified Harrier GR3, an all-metal aircraft that was withdrawn from RAF service in the late 1980s, investment will instead be concentrated on the more modern Harrier GR7 that will be upgraded to GR9 standard to provide an enhanced expeditionary capability for land attack operations from both land and aircraft carriers.

Harriers

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment has been made of the benefits of integrating the Sea Harrier's specific capabilities on to the remaining GR Harriers; and if he will make a statement.

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of upgrading the Harrier GR7 to include an advanced air defence radar capable of using AMRAAM; what the cost is estimated to be; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The role of the Harrier GR7 is in support of force projection. Its air-to-air capability is optimised for its own defence. To integrate the Sea Harrier's specific air defence capabilities on to the GR Harrier would entail the fitting of the Blue Vixen radar and Advance Medium Range Air to Air Missiles (AMRAAM) missiles. While it would, in theory, be possible to do this we currently have no requirement to do so. Therefore no detailed work has been undertaken by the Department into the practicality and cost effectiveness of such a modification.
	Such a programme would be at least as complex, lengthy and costly as the Sea Harrier Blue Vixen/ AMRAAM update in the mid-90s. Given the considerable cost, time scale and technical risk involved, and the planned entry into service of the Future Joint Combat Aircraft in 2012, the benefits of integrating the Sea Harrier specific capabilities onto the GR Harrier would be of limited duration and utility.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the (a) French, (b) Spanish, (c) Italian and (d) German defence ministers in respect of his decision to withdraw the Sea Harrier from service.

Adam Ingram: holding reply Monday 20 May 2002
	None. I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 28 February 2002, Official Report, column 2452W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer). These countries will be advised of this change as part of the annual submission to the NATO Defence Planning Questionnaire, and also in the annual update to the european Headline Goal Helsinki Catalogue.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he had with the (a) US Defence Secretary and (b) NATO Secretary General in respect of his decision to withdraw the Sea Harrier from service.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	None. I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 28 February 2002, Official Report, column 1451W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer). The United States of America and NATO will be advised of this change as part of the annual submission to the NATO Defence Planning Questionnaire.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of continuing the Harrier FA2 in service until 2012 without an engine upgrade; and what estimate he has made of the cost of this.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	In determining the future strategy for Joint Force Harrier ahead of the introduction of the Future Joint Combat Aircraft in around 2012 a variety of investment strategies were considered for both Harrier GR7 and Sea Harrier FA2. Our recent operational experience, and consideration of likely future threats, led us to conclude that the priority is for carrier-borne aircraft that can fulfil the ground attack role. The Sea Harrier FA2 has an extremely limited ground attack capability and without a new engine, a high risk technical challenge, has major performance limitations. Further, a number of the FA2's avionic and defensive systems are becoming increasingly obsolescent and by the middle of the decade will have significant operational deficiencies. The cost of recovering this obsolescence would be around £250 million. Such a significant investment was deemed incoherent without a more powerful engine that could deliver world-wide year-round embarked capability and when it would only restore elements of the air defence capability. It would do nothing to equip the aircraft to carry current and near term smart offensive weapons, our key future need. This would have required a full replacement of the avionic system which was judged to be unachievable.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to upgrade the air-to-air capability of the Harrier GR7; and if he plans to fit the aircraft with AMRAAM missiles.

Lewis Moonie: holding answer 20 May 2002
	We have no plans to upgrade the existing air to air capability of the Harrier GR7.
	AMRAAM will not be fitted to Harrier GR7, nor do we intend to integrate the missile onto the aircraft during the programme to upgrade GR7 to GR9 standard.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the remaining Harrier GR7s will be upgraded to GR9; and how many GR9s will be in service at the end of the upgrade programme.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	We currently plan to upgrade all Harrier GR7 aircraft to GR9 standard, up to 68 aircraft in total. The GR7 upgrade programme is due to begin in late 2003 and be completed during 2008.

Harriers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost is of upgrading the Harrier GR7 to GR9; and what estimate he has made of the cost of upgrading the engine of the Harrier FA2.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 13 March 2002, Official Report, columns 1166–67W.
	The integration of the Pegasus Mk 107 engine into 11 Sea Harrier FA2 aircraft was the subject of a feasibility study in 2000. The cost of integration was estimated to be approximately £230 million. The study concluded that there would be significant technical difficulties and that overall the programme did not represent good value for money.

Army Headquarters

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answers of 19 December 2001, Official Report, column 340W, and of 28 February 2002, Official Report, column 1463W, on Army HQ, when the final assessment of the cost of moving the Army's northern headquarters from York to Edinburgh will have been made.

Adam Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 28 February 2002, Official Report, column 1463W. I will, of course, write to him when the assessment is complete and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

Arms Sales

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what occasions P. W. Pains Wessex have attended MOD-organised sales and marketing events in the past two years; and what was the nature of their attendance.

Adam Ingram: I understand that P. W. Defence Ltd. was formed last September from the amalgamation of several subsidiaries of the Chemring Group plc. Delegates from the company attended the Ministry of Defence's Export Services Organisation's symposium for defence exporters held in March 2002.
	Attendance by companies attending or exhibiting at other sales and marketing events organised by commercial organisations is a matter for the organisers concerned.

Military Ethos

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his assessment is of the way in which military ethos has changed since 1997.

Adam Ingram: The core values of the armed services have not changed since 1997.

Military Ethos

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his assessment is of the benefits of a distinct military ethos to the effectiveness of the British Army.

Adam Ingram: Military ethos may be defined as:
	"That spirit which inspires soldiers to fight. It derives from, and depends upon, the high degrees of commitment, self-sacrifice and mutual trust which together are so essential to the maintenance of morale".
	This was articulated in the pamphlet "Values and Standards of the British Army", which was published in March 2000, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.
	We believe that the constituent values of military ethos contribute significantly to military effectiveness.

Joint Strike Fighter

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what extra capability the £600 million of UK specific requirement for the Joint Strike Fighter will provide; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The estimate of £600 million, which was announced in January 2001, will optimise the aircraft's capability for the United Kingdom environment. It represents the costs of providing and integrating certain UK weapons systems, to be selected in due course, securing the Joint Strike Fighter's compatibility with UK Command and Control arrangements and ensuring compliance with our safety and environmental requirements.

Eurofighter

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the impact of a lack of BVRAAM on the Eurofighter's operational ability; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Eurofighter's primary role is air superiority. Without a BVRAAM, it would be wholly reliant on short-range missiles in this role and would be disadvantaged in medium and beyond visual range engagements. We have therefore assessed that Eurofighter will require a BVRAAM capability. From the outset, it is planned that the aircraft will be cleared to carry and fire the Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile (AMRAAM). This capability will be enhanced by the acquisition of Meteor. Meteor's planned In-Service Date is 2012.

Eurofighter

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the contracted June 2002 delivery date for the Eurofighter will be achieved; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Dr. Moonie) on 30 April 2002, Official Report, column 745W. We are now considering the results of this review, including the implications for delivery dates, and will make an announcement shortly.

Trigat

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what off-the-shelf options are being evaluated to replace the Medium Range Trigat; how much they cost; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Two off-the-shelf medium range anti- tank guided weapon systems are being evaluated to replace the capability which Medium Range Trigat was expected to deliver for use by Light Forces and Mechanised Infantry: Javelin offered by a joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin and supported by the US Government; and Spike offered by MBDA.
	As part of the evaluation the Ministry of Defence is conducting a commercial competition between the two equipments, and as such I am withholding details of the costs in accordance with Exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

European Court of Human Rights

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the financial consequences of the Lewis ECHR case.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	I assume that the question concerns a case before the European Court of Human Rights, but we do not immediately recognise a Lewis case. I answered a question from the hon. Member on 1 March about that court's judgment in the case of Mr. Morris, Official Report, column 1624W, and it may be this to which he is now referring.
	Hitherto there have been no quantifiable financial consequences for the Ministry of Defence as a result of this case, apart from legal fees and the award by the court of a proportion of Mr. Morris's costs.

HMS Ocean

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how long HMS Ocean has been at sea on her current deployment; and when she will return to the UK.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	HMS Ocean has been at sea on her current deployment since 11 February 2002. On current plans she returns to the United Kingdom (Plymouth) in early June 2002.

HMS Ocean

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what technical difficulties HMS Ocean has experienced on her current deployment.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	HMS Ocean has experienced some minor technical difficulties during her current deployment. These were associated with the propulsion system, air conditioning and chilled water plant, the side ramp and some other equipments and systems. Such difficulties are consistent with a deployment of this duration and nature. The majority have already been resolved and none has adversely affected HMS Ocean's ability to undertake her operational tasks at any stage of her deployment.

Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the contribution of the anti-ballistic missile treaty to strategic stability.

Geoff Hoon: We have always valued strategic stability between the United States and Russia, a stability to which the anti-ballistic missile treaty made a major contribution throughout the cold war. But it is important to recognise that the strategic context is changing and that it is stability we value rather than one particular means for achieving it. To this end we welcome the progress that the United States and Russia have made towards a new strategic framework, in particular their recent agreement on major reductions in nuclear weapons.

Performance Targets

Jonathan R Shaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what key targets have been set for the Ministry of Defence Police Agency for the financial year 2002–03.

Lewis Moonie: The following key targets have been set for the Ministry of Defence Police Agency:
	Key Target 1:
	To achieve at least 65% patrol activity from those officers devoted to patrolling.
	Key Target 2:
	To achieve a crime-solving rate of 42 per cent. for the investigation of primary crime.
	Key Target 3:
	By 31 March 2003, to ensure that the force fulfils at least 95 per cent. of its agreed customer taskings at those establishments where the force undertakes security related taskings.
	Key Target 4:
	By 31 March 2003, to have the appropriate systems in place to evaluate the force's effective contribution to security measures at those establishments where the force undertakes security related taskings.
	Key Target 5:
	By 31 March 2003, to have implemented the Force Diversity Action Plan, and within the overall recruitment to the force to have recruited 30 per cent. women and 8 per cent. from minority ethnic communities.
	Key Target 6:
	By 31 March 2003, to reduce the amount of overtime worked by each officer to no more than 48 hours overtime per 28 day period averaged over a 17 week period.

ASTOR

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many ASTOR aircraft he plans to procure.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Five aircraft are being procured for the ASTOR programme.

Armed Forces Personnel (Deaths on Military Premises)

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what factors are taken into account when determining which organisations investigate the circumstances of a death or serious injury of a member of Her Majesty's armed forces on his Department's property.

Adam Ingram: Jurisdiction for the investigation of incidents resulting in death or serious injury will vary depending upon the nature of the incident and whether it occurs in the United Kingdom, overseas or, in the case of the Royal Navy, on board ship. The rules governing jurisdiction are detailed in the Queen's Regulations for each service. In the case of a death in the United Kingdom, primacy for any investigation lies with the local civilian police force, who would usually be supported by the appropriate service police authority or Ministry of Defence police, and other agencies as required. For example, where a death is suspected to have been caused by an accident, an investigation could also be carried out by a service accident investigation team. Cause of death can only be concluded by Her Majesty's Coroner. A service Board of Inquiry would normally be carried out following the conclusion of any associated police investigations.
	In cases of serious injury, factors such as the cause of injury, level of severity and any suspicion of criminality would determine whether the civilian police, Ministry of Defence police or service police authorities would investigate. Again, where serious injury is suspected to have been caused by an accident, the relevant service accident investigation team could also be involved. All of these factors would be considered in determining whether a service Board of Inquiry is required.

RAF Portreath

Candy Atherton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the volume of waste to be removed from land at RAF Portreath as part of the Ministry of Defence's clean-up operation; what guidance has been issued to local authorities and agencies responsible for the removal and disposal of waste from RAF Portreath; at which locations waste from RAF Portreath will be deposited; and what assurances he has given local residents and local authorities regarding the disposal of waste removed from RAF Portreath in landfill.

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence is currently undertaking the planning process for the voluntary remediation of five dump sites at RAF Portreath. For these purposes it is estimated that the total waste from all five dumps is approximately 100,000 cu m of material, which is likely to be a mix of inert, hazardous and special waste.
	On completion of the planning process and the consultation phase, involving the local authorities, residents and interested agencies, MOD will issue the relevant information and guidance.

Landmines

Roger Berry: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the British armed forces have (a) procured and (b) deployed the E100 Series Integrated Grenade System with the fragmentation grenade E105 incorporated into the trip wire mechanism manufactured by PW Defence.

Adam Ingram: The British armed forces have never procured or deployed the E100 Series Integrated Grenade System with the fragmentation grenade E105 incorporated into the trip wire mechanism manufactured by PW Defence.

Landmines

Roger Berry: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions have taken place between his officials and PW Defence regarding the status of the E100 Series Integrated Grenade System and fragmentation grenade E105 incorporated into the trip wire mechanism under the Landmines Act 1998.

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence has not had any discussions with PW Defence regarding the status of the E100 Series Integrated Grenade System and fragmentation grenade E105 incorporated into the trip wire mechanism under the Landmines Act 1998.

Low-flying Areas

Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will initiate a system of independent review of decisions concerning low-flying areas.

Adam Ingram: Decisions taken in respect of the United Kingdom Low Flying System are already subject to appropriate review. Such reviews may include investigations by the Defence Flying Complaints Investigation Team, consultation across Ministry of Defence and reference to external specialists as necessary.

Type 45 Destroyers

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the planned in-service dates are for each of the ordered type 45 destroyers.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 16 May 2002
	The First of Class, HMS Daring, is planned to enter service in late 2007, with the second ship, HMS Dauntless following in 2009. It is planned that the remaining four ships on contract will enter service at intervals up until 2011.

Type 45 Destroyers

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what basis the decision was made to reject the BAE proposal to build all 12 type 45 warships; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The BAE Systems unsolicited proposal was very carefully considered. However, it was decided not to take it further because of the serious implications it would have for competition downstream for future United Kingdom warships and the very substantial forward commitment it sought on a variety of shipbuilding programmes. The revised type 45 procurement strategy, announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 10 July 2001, should offer better value for money in the longer run, if it enables competition to be pursued on other warship programmes.

Naval Dockyards

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many sites in the UK are capable of assembling a large enough vessel to operate conventional take-off and landing aircraft; what modifications are needed to potential sites to bring them to this capability; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: It is assumed that the question refers to potential sites for the assembly of the United Kingdom's future aircraft carrier. The competing primes on the carrier programme—BAE Systems and Thales—are assessing the capability of a number of sites within the United Kingdom that have the potential to participate in the build (the construction and outfitting of modules or blocks of the vessel) and assembly (the joining together of the blocks into a whole ship in a dry dock of sufficient size). No final decisions have been made on the mix of sites that will be utilised in the ship build programme. A number of potential facilities for assembly have been identified to date, including Harland and Wolff in Belfast, Inch Green on the Clyde, and Swan Hunter on Tyneside. Other potential assembly sites continue to be assessed and much will depend on the design and dimensions of the carrier that is eventually taken forward and the method of construction. The two prime contractors are due to submit proposals on ship procurement towards the end of this year. This will include preferred assembly sites together with an assessment of any required modifications.

Warship Procurement

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to publish the RAND study into warship procurement; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Pursuant to my reply to the hon. Member on 16 July 2001, Official Report, columns 1–2W, RAND have completed their study into alternative procurement strategies for the Ministry of Defence's future warship programme. Interim results from the study helped inform the MOD's decision to proceed with a revised procurement strategy for the type 45 destroyer, as announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 10 July 2001, Official Report, columns 675–85.
	It was originally planned that RAND would publish a report of their findings last autumn. However, it has taken them longer than expected to produce it for a variety of reasons, including a redirection of effort to undertake more urgent work into shipbuilding strategies for the future carrier and disruption caused by the events of 11 September. RAND have also been at pains to produce the best possible report and have accordingly engaged in detailed consultation with interested parties over its content. The report is now very close to being finalised and is scheduled for publication this June.

RAF Bases

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what meetings (a) he and (b) his officials have held with representatives of local authorities to discuss options for RAF Lyneham.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	As the first round of the consultation process for the Strategic Review of RAF Lyneham, RAF Brize Norton and RAF St. Mawgan, a meeting was held between officials and representatives of the relevant local authorities and Regional Development Agencies on 29 January. As the review progresses, further meetings will be held. Neither my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence nor I have met any representatives of local authorities to discuss options for RAF Lyneham.

Bases

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence where each of the (a) Astute class submarines and (b) EF2000 will be based.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The basing of the Astute class submarines is currently being considered as part of a wider review of base-porting and waterfront infrastructure. The review is proceeding to schedule and it is hoped that announcements will be made during the summer of this year. The Eurofighter will be based at RAF Leeming, RAF Leuchars and RAF Coningsby.

Private Finance Initiative

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the length is of the PFI contracts for (a) the River class offshore patrol vessels and (b) the RN ro-ros; and what criteria he uses to decide the optimal length of PFI contracts on such ships.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The River class offshore patrol vessel contract is an operating lease arrangement rather than a pure PFI deal. It has a duration of five years with the option to extend. The ro-ro contract is still being negotiated but the intention is that it will be a service-based PFI running until 2024.
	The optimal length of any PFI type contract varies according to the circumstances of the particular deal. In practice this means taking account of the duration and scope of the requirement, the potential asset life and residual value at the end of the deal, and optimising capital financing charges. These key criteria are considered together with the scope for risk transfer to determine the length of contract that is expected to deliver the optimal value for money solution for the project.

Throckmorton Airfield

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on changes in the ownership of land at and adjacent to Throckmorton airfield since 1992 with reference to the Crichel Down rules.

Adam Ingram: Since 1992 the Ministry of Defence has not recorded any sales of land at Throckmorton airfield although some leases have been completed in areas of land and buildings. Most of the Throckmorton site, formerly known as DERA Pershore, is now owned by QinetiQ. The remainder of the site, used last year to deal with some of the consequences of the foot and mouth outbreak, is in the final stages of being transferred to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
	All of the property sold to QinetiQ was exempted from the provisions of the Crichel Down rules under provision 14.6 concerning the transfer of Government functions to the private sector.

Nepal

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what military assistance has been provided to Nepal in the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Nepal is a long-standing friend of the United Kingdom and our armies have always had close links. Over the past five years, the UK has provided low-level military assistance to Nepal through the provision of places on training courses in the UK, limited training in country with UK experts and the supply of non-lethal equipment. The Royal Nepalese Army personnel have routinely sent students to our Joint Staff College at Shrivenham, on commissioning courses at Sandhurst and to the Royal College of Defence Studies.
	All our military courses are undertaken within the framework of the democratic and accountable use of military force in order to improve the general professionalism of the RNA. They include modules on legal use of force, proportionality and respect for human rights.
	The UK is also funding infrastructure work being undertaken at the regional peacekeeping centre at Panchkal.

A400M

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will make an announcement about the A400M project.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence gave on 8 May 2002, Official Report, column 176W.

A400M

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what impact the delay to the A400M project will have on his consideration of the future of RAF Lyneham.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The delay to the A400M project is not expected to have any effect on the conclusions that will be reached by the strategic review on the future roles of RAF Lyneham, RAF Brize Norton and RAF St. Mawgan.

Defence Co-operation

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what funding will be made available for the facilitation of multinational brigades and possible multinational battalions for international operations as agreed in the meeting between the Defence Ministers of Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Norway and the UK in Alesund, Norway; what are the terms of the agreement; and if he will make a statement.

Geoff Hoon: At the Nordic Defence Ministers' meeting in Alesund, I signed a Letter of Intent that provides the basis for the United Kingdom's co-operation with NORDCAPS (the Nordic Co-ordinated Arrangement for Peace Support). This builds on the co-operative arrangements that we already enjoy with our Nordic partners in the Balkans. Our involvement is on a case-by-case basis. It does not commit the UK to participate in operations, exercises or training, and no additional funding has been made available.
	NORDCAPS, and the UK's co-operation with it, is an excellent example of how multinational defence co-operation can enhance overall military capability. It is a pool of Nordic forces (in this case from Denmark, Norway, Finland and Sweden) available for peace support operations by summer 2003.

Infantry Training

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the infantry wastage rate for Army recruits embarking on phase 1 of their infantry training was in each of the last five years; and what measures are in place to combat wastage.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The figures requested are as follows:
	
		Per cent. 
		
			  Year Wastage rate for infantry phase 1 training 
		
		
			 1997–98 29.6 
			 1998–99 21.2 
			 1999–2000 19.9 
			 2000–01 23.9 
			 2001–02 21.8 
		
	
	Measures in place to combat wastage include:
	Training teams at the Recruit Selection Centres to run military activities to motivate and enthuse the candidates. Candidates also receive briefing on what they can expect in training and the opportunity to meet recruits in phase 1 training. This applies to all employment groups.
	Phase 1 instructors undergo a two-week induction course designed to give them the skills to deal with new recruits and to help them provide nurturing to recruits during training to minimise wastage.
	Infantry phase 1 and 2 training has now been combined into one course at Catterick. Trials conducted last year showed that a considerable reduction in overall wastage could be achieved by allowing training to be more progressive over the combined course, particularly on the physical demands of infantry training. Rehabilitation facilities across the phase 1 training establishments and at Catterick have been improved to assist those recruits injured during training to recover more quickly and rejoin training.
	The adoption of the combined phase 1 and 2 infantry course has enabled mid-course leave and adventure training to be introduced into the syllabus at Catterick; a retention positive measure.

Infantry Training

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  how many Army recruits will wait for more than one month until they can be admitted to those waiting to be admitted to phase 1 of infantry training;
	(2)  how many soldiers are awaiting training.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	As at 16 May 2002, there were 2,668 potential recruits in the system who have passed selection (i.e. received a job offer) but have not yet enlisted (i.e. finally accepted the offer). This figure includes those who are awaiting allocation to a training vacancy; those who are already allocated but not yet enlisted because their allocated course is more than 21 days away; those who have chosen to delay entry for personal reasons, such as work or educational commitments; junior entrants whose courses do not commence until July and September this year; and finally a proportion who remain undecided on whether or not to accept the job offer. Of the 2,668, 474 are earmarked for the infantry already; 113 are awaiting a course allocation, 361 are allocated to a course commencing after 16 June 2002.
	This figure changes on an almost daily basis as new recruits commence training and others pass selection. The Army Training and Recruiting Agency's Allocation Committee meets weekly in order to plan the loading of recruits onto courses; the aim is always to minimise the waiting time.

Golden Jubilee

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Royal Navy ships and Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships will be involved in events connected with Her Majesty the Queen's Golden Jubilee celebrations; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The key tri-service event is in Portsmouth on 27 June. The following ships will be present during Her Majesty's visit:
	
		
			  Name of Ship 
		
		
			 Aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal 
			 Destroyer HMS Cardiff 
			 Frigate HMS Cornwall 
			 Frigate HMS Kent 
			 Frigate HMS Lancaster 
			 Offshore patrol vessel HMS Alderney 
			 Mine counter measure vessel HMS Bangor 
			 Mine counter measure vessel HMS Cattistock 
			 Mine counter measure vessel HMS Hurworth 
			 Mine counter measure vessel HMS Penzance 
			 University RN unit patrol craft HMS Blazer 
			 University RN unit patrol craft HMS Dasher 
			 University RN unit patrol craft HMS Raider 
			 University RN unit patrol craft HMS Tracker 
			 Royal fleet auxiliaries RFA Fort Victoria 
			 Royal fleet auxiliaries RFA Sir Bedivere 
		
	
	Royal Navy vessels will participate in other single Golden Jubilee events elsewhere in the United Kingdom as their constantly changing operational tasking permits.

Cadets

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many cadets there are in the (a) Army Cadet Force, (b) Air Cadets, (c) Sea Cadets and (d) Combined Cadet Force.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	As at 1 April 2001, the most recent date for which figures are available, the numbers of cadets was as follows:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 Army Cadet Force 40,573 
			 Air Training Corps 33,177 
			 Sea Cadet Corps 10,662 
			 Combined Cadet Force 40,783 
			  
			 Total 125,195

Cadets

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what targets are in place for numbers of cadets.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	There are no targets set by any of the four cadet forces for numbers of cadets. We are constantly encouraging young people to consider the development opportunities offered by the cadets and hope to see as many as possible join in order to benefit from these.

Frigates

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the complement is of each type 23 and type 22 frigate.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The complement for each type 22 and type 23 frigate is shown in the table.
	
		
			 Ship Complement 
		
		
			 Type 22  
			 Sheffield 234 
			 Cornwall 240 
			 Cumberland 238 
			 Campbeltown 225 
			 Chatham 239 
			   
			 Type 23  
			 Norfolk 173 
			 Marlborough 167 
			 Argyll 169 
			 Lancaster 169 
			 Iron Duke 169 
			 Monmouth 168 
			 Montrose 168 
			 Westminster 168 
			 Northumberland 171 
			 Richmond 169 
			 Somerset 168 
			 Grafton 168 
			 Sutherland 169 
			 Kent 168 
			 Portland 168 
			 St. Albans 173

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Foot and Mouth

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will place in the Library copies of (a) the minutes of meetings held between departmental ministers and the Chief Veterinary Officer and (b) the minutes of meetings and other communications between Ministers and (i) the Environment Agency, (ii) SEAC and (iii) European Union officials, in respect of dealing with foot and mouth, since the outbreak of the disease.

Elliot Morley: Minutes of meetings between Ministers and others are not normally disclosed.

Foot and Mouth

David Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish the advice which her Department and the Prime Minister received from the Chief Scientist on foot and mouth disease.

Elliot Morley: Advice which Ministers receive from officials is not normally made public.

Refrigerators and Freezers

Michael Jack: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will place in the Library copies of representations received from the UK retail industry from October 2000 about EU Regulation 2037/2000.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 11 February 2002
	I will place copies of these representations in the Library within the next week, subject to agreement from the authors.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what professional indemnity insurance clause is part of her Department's standard consultants' contract.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 April 2002
	The Department's standard conditions of contract for indemnity and insurance is set out below.
	The Contractor shall indemnify the Department, the Crown, its servants and agents against all actions, claims demands, costs and expenses incurred by or made against each or any of them in respect of any loss or damage (including consequential and indirect loss, loss of profit, goodwill or revenue) or personal injury (including death) which arises out of or in connection with his and any sub-contractor's performance of the Services under this contract.
	The indemnity contained in the Condition above shall not apply to the extent that the loss, damage or injury is caused by the negligent or wilful act or omission of the Department, the Crown or any servant or agent of the Crown.
	The Contractor shall have in force and maintain and shall require any sub-contractor to have in force and maintain insurance with a reputable insurance company, including (but not limited) to employer's liability, public liability and professional indemnity insurance, for such range of cover as the Contractor deems to be appropriate but covering at least all matters which are the subject of indemnities or compensation obligations under these Conditions in such sum as may be specified in the Contract Letter, or, if no such sum is specified, the sum of not less than £5,000,000 for any one incident and unlimited in total.
	The policy or policies of insurance referred to in the condition above shall be shown to the Department whenever it requests, together with satisfactory evidence of payment of premiums.
	The terms of any insurance or the amount of cover shall not relieve the Contractor of any liabilities under the Contract.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how often she has made an exception to the professional indemnity requirement of her Department's standard consultants' contract in the last five years.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 April 2002
	DEFRA came into being on 8 June 2001. The information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent representations she has received from small businesses about the level of professional indemnity insurance in contracts with her Department; and if she will make a statement about professional indemnity insurance with small contractors.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 April 2002
	From information held centrally, the Department is unaware of any recent representations received from small businesses about the level of professional indemnity insurance in contracts with the Department.
	Departments are expected to set the level of professional indemnity insurance at a level appropriate to the size of the contract and the level of risk involved. The terms of any insurance or the amount of cover shall not relieve the contractor of any liabilities under the contract.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what level of professional indemnity insurance was required by her Department of small businesses contracted with them in (a) 1997, (b) 1998, (c) 1999, (d) 2000, (e) 2001 and (f) 2002.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 April 2002
	DEFRA came into being on 8 June 2001. The information requested can be supplied only at disproportionate cost.

Small Business Contracts

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many small businesses have individual contracts with her Department.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 April 2002
	DEFRA came into being on 8 June, 2001. From information held centrally, it is estimated that DEFRA has dealings with 2,799 contractors falling to be classed as small businesses.

Agrimonetary Compensation

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much agrimonetary compensation the Government can draw down for (a) dairy, (b) sheep and (c) arable farmers.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 26 April 2002
	The Government could have claimed approximately £37 million for the dairy sector and £9 million for the sheep sector. No agrimonetary compensation was available for arable farmers in that package. While we acknowledge the difficulties the livestock sector is facing and are working with them on the recommendations of the Policy Commission on Farming and Food, we have decided not to make a claim on these funds given the many competing demands on the Exchequer at present, particularly as more than eighty per cent. of the £46 million would in effect have to be met by the British taxpayer.

Digital Equipment

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many digital radios are owned by her Department for use in departmental buildings from which Ministers work; and what the (a) cost and (b) date of purchase of each radio was.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 26 April 2002
	DEFRA came into being on 8 June, 2001. From information held centrally, no digital radios are owned by the Department for use in departmental buildings in which Ministers work.

Farming Industry

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what changes have taken place in each of the past 10 years in the value of (a) farmland and (b) farms and farm buildings.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 29 April 2002
	Disaggregated data that distinguish overall farmland values from farms and farm buildings values are not available. Estimates for the valuations of land and buildings together in the UK can be derived on a consistent basis since 1993 from the aggregate agricultural balance sheet.
	
		Estimated UK values—land and buildings(1)
		
			 As at December each year £ million 
		
		
			 1993 50, 702 
			 1994 56, 286 
			 1995 67, 876 
			 1996 77, 424 
			 1997 84, 038 
			 1998 84, 643 
			 1999 90, 605 
			 2000 93, 665 
		
	
	(1) The valuations of land and buildings are at average market prices. Includes the value of owner-occupied and tenanted land. Includes that proportion of the dwelling house that is attributed to business use.
	One important component in determining such values are market prices and the relevant series for England are shown. The tables give the changes that have taken place in (a) the value of agricultural land transacted in England and (b) the value of land and agricultural buildings in England since 1993 as represented by the average price of land sold in these categories. The data can be supplied only on a consistent basis back to 1993, as since then the category 'agricultural land' refers strictly to "land only", whereas the prior to 1993 it could include dwelling-house attachments. In addition the previous series was calculated on an October–September basis as opposed to a calendar year basis for the series from 1993.
	
		Average price of agricultural land in England
		
			   £ per hectare 
		
		
			 1993 3,791 
			 1994 4,229 
			 1995 4,788 
			 1996 6,058 
			 1997 6,448 
			 1998 6,139 
			 1999 6,645 
			 2000 7,051 
		
	
	
		Average price of land and agricultural buildings in England
		
			   £ per hectare 
		
		
			 1993 3,315 
			 1994 3,918 
			 1995 5,125 
			 1996 5,596 
			 1997 6,565 
			 1998 6,300 
			 1999 6,268 
			 2000 7,104

Illegal Logging

Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the answer of 18 April 2002, Official Report, column 1064W, which countries other than Indonesia she has (a) made approaches to and (b) intends to approach for negotiations on illegal logging and associated trade.

Michael Meacher: The Government have informally discussed the memorandum with representatives of the United States, Japan, Canada, New Zealand and Malaysia. The Government have also raised the memorandum with EU member states and the Commission at a recent European Union workshop on Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade. The European Commission has recently committed to produce an Action Plan on illegal logging and associated trade by the end of this year.
	The Government also plans to raise the memorandum with both timber producing and timber consuming countries at the next Preparatory Committee for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Bali, 27 May to 7 June) and with African countries at the next African Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (Brazzaville in June) as a possible model for taking forward actions on combating illegal logging on a bilateral basis in support of existing international commitments, for example under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Forum on Forests.

Veterinary Service

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list the proportion of her departmental budget allocated to the state veterinary service broken down by main category of expenditure, in each of the last 10 years.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 7 May 2002
	The proportion of budget allocated to the state veterinary service has been:
	
		
			 Year Administration costs (£ million) Programme costs (£ million) Capital (£ million) Total expenditure (£ million) Total budget (%) 
		
		
			 1995–96 36.7 24.3 0.3 61.3 6.6 
			 1996–97 32.0 35.1 0.5 67.6 6.0 
			 1997–98 33.8 33.6 0.2 67.7 7.2 
			 1998–99 34.2 47.0 1.0 82.3 8.8 
			 1999–2000 35.5 37.2 1.7 74.3 7.6 
			 2000–01 41.1 52.7 1.1 94.9 9.1 
			 2001–02 45.6 48.4 1.0 95.0 1.7 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The expenditure figures reflect the outturns at 31 March each year;
	2. Figures for 1992–93 to 1994–95 are not readily to hand and constructing them would involve disproportionate cost;
	3. Budgets can fluctuate because of disease outbreaks in certain years (eg foot and mouth) and because of departmental structural changes (eg creation of DEFRA in 2001–02).

Veterinary Service

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to her answer of 8 May 2002, Official Report, column 162W, on the veterinary service, how many private veterinary surgeons have (a) applied, (b) received temporary appointments and (c) received permanent appointments as local veterinary inspectors broken down by region in each of the last 10 years.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	Information regarding the number of private veterinary surgeons who (a) have applied, and (b) received temporary appointments as local veterinary inspectors (LVIs) broken down by region in each of the last ten years could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Numbers of private veterinary surgeons who received new permanent appointments as LVIs broken down by region in each of the last ten years is set out in the table.
	
		
			 Year North East West Scotland Wales 
		
		
			 1992 29 61 11 30 11 
			 1993 1,027 1,383 1,006 214 256 
			 1994 190 165 98 56 47 
			 1995 152 147 111 50 84 
			 1996 128 156 97 41 49 
			 1997 188 176 108 63 53 
			 1998 160 195 112 52 42 
			 1999 222 265 119 50 50 
			 2000 195 298 130 52 73 
			 2001 185 205 109 49 56 
		
	
	Note:
	Total LVIs permanently appointed on 17 May 2002 are 7,506.

Veterinary Service

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to change the state veterinary service in Scotland.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 15 May 2002
	The State veterinary service is a GB body responsible to all GB Agriculture Ministers. Were any changes to the existing arrangements as they apply to Scotland to be considered, then these would be developed fully with the Scottish Executive.

Veterinary Service

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received regarding the future of the state veterinary service in Scotland.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 15 May 2002
	None.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee on agricultural structures and rural development is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alun Michael: The European Union's Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development (STAR) covers issues regarding the implementation of the Rural Development Regulation and the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD; an instrument for support of rural development in pre-accession countries). The committee functions as an advisory or "management comitology committee" according to the issue before it.
	The committee normally meets monthly and has met 13 times in the last 12 months.
	The UK representation at the committee is provided by DEFRA. The Commission pays transport costs for two delegates attending each meeting. Our costs amount to approximately 4,000 (£2,500) per annum.
	Current issues under consideration at the committee are:
	(a) Annual Modifications to country and regional rural development programmes,
	(b) Implementation of SAPARD,
	(c) Monitoring and Evaluation of Rural Development Programmes.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Advisory Committee for the implementation of the directive on the reduction of the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The role of the Advisory Committee is to assist the Commission with matters on which it is required to take a decision under the provisions of the directive such as considering requests from member states for derogations and on the format of reports. There was one meeting of the Committee over the last 12 months at which the UK was represented by an official from my Department at a travel and subsistence cost of about £150. That meeting considered a request from Greece for a derogation; there are no other matters currently under consideration. The annual cost of the work includes the time taken to prepare for and attend meetings and the travel and subsistence costs incurred. Specific information is not available without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the implementation of legislation on ambient air quality assessment and management is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The role of the Committee is to decide on amendments to technical measures described in the directive and to assist the Commission in preparing detailed instructions on the forwarding of information. There have been no meetings of the Committee over the last 12 months. The UK would usually be represented by an official from my Department. The annual cost of the work includes the time taken to prepare for and attend meetings and the travel and subsistence costs incurred. Specific information is not available without incurring disproportionate cost. There are no matters currently under consideration.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of the directive on bathing water is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months is; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: The Committee for the adaptation to the technical progress on the quality of bathing water is a regulatory committee provided for under Article 10 of the EC bathing water directive.
	The Committee has met twice over the last 12 months with the UK incurring £2,150 in annual costs. The UK can be represented by up to four policy officials.
	The Committee has recently been considering a revised bathing water policy and reporting arrangements under the existing bathing water directive.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the committee for the adaptation to technical and scientific progress of the Directive on the protection of the environment and in particular of the soil when sewage sludge is used in agriculture is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: Article 14 of Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture, provides for the establishment of a committee to adapt the Directive to technical or scientific progress.
	This committee has not met in the last twelve months and has no items currently under consideration. If it were to meet, costs to the public purse would be limited to the cost of any additional work incurred in contributing to its considerations and any travel and subsistence expenses of officials representing the United Kingdom not met by the Commission.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the committee for the adaptation to technical progress of the Directive on air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: This part of Directive 85/203/EEC on air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide has been repealed.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the committee for the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of the Directive on a limit value for lead in the air is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: This part of Directive 82/884/EEC on a limit value for lead in the air has been repealed.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee on the monitoring mechanism of emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the Community is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The Committee on the monitoring mechanism of emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the Community was established by Council Decision 93/389/EEC of 24 June 1993 (as amended by Council Decision 1999/296/EC of 26 April 1999). The monitoring mechanism is an instrument to assess accurately and regularly the extent of progress being made towards the Community's commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol.
	The Committee has met twice in the last 12 months. The UK is usually represented by two officials from my Department. The costs incurred by the Department in contributing to the Committee's work are largely travel and subsistence costs of about £650 per meeting, incurred in attending the one day meetings in Brussels, and staff costs of about £700 per meeting. In addition to the time spent at the meetings themselves, officials spend a similar amount of time preparing for and reporting back on the meetings.
	Items currently being considered by the Committee include submissions to the UNFCCC on the EU greenhouse gas emissions inventory and a possible revision to the monitoring mechanism decision in the light of the Marrakech Accords.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of the Directive on protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The mandate of the EC Nitrates Regulatory Committee is to assist the European Commission in responding to scientific and technical progress relevant to the requirements of the Nitrates Directive.
	The Committee meets twice a year.
	Four representatives are permitted from each member state. The Commission pays for one representative to attend from each member state. Additional experts from the UK cost between £300 and £400 per representative per meeting.
	Items under consideration for the next meeting include a technical discussion on manure spreading on grassland, discussion of guidelines for monitoring groundwaters for high nitrate concentrations and discussion of criteria used to identify eutrophic waters. The Committee has also recently heard and voted on derogation requests from member states and discussed comparisons of implementation and Action Programme measures between member states.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the adaptation to technical and scientific progress of the air quality limit values and guide values for sulphur dioxide and suspended particulates is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: This part of directive 80/779/EEC on air quality limit values and guide values for sulphur dioxide and suspended particles has been repealed.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Standing Committee for implementation of the Directive on the marketing of biocidal products is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply.
	The Standing Committee on Biocidal Products (SCBP) has several functions specified in Directive 98/8/EC, including delivering opinions to the Commission on adoption of regulations governing the review of active substances; the inclusion of active substances in Annex I of the Directive; the mutual recognition of biocidal products across member states; the temporary authorisation of products in emergency situations; common conditions and minimum data requirements for authorisations for research and development purposes; and public disclosure and confidentiality of information. The first meeting of the SCBP took place on 18 May 2000. This has been its only meeting to date. There are no items currently under consideration by the SCBP. The UK representation at such meetings would depend on the subject(s) under consideration, and would normally consist of officials of the Health and Safety Executive. The draft rules prescribe that the Commission will cover the expenses of one representative per member state, and so the cost to UK public funds is minimal.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1994/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on training in architecture is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply.
	The mandate of the Advisory Committee on Training and Education in the Field of Architecture (ACETA) is to help to ensure a comparably high standard of education and training for architects throughout the Community and permit free movement of people and provision of services as Single Market objectives. It has met once in the last 12 months.
	The UK Delegation consists of one Government official from my Department, the chief executive of the Architects Registration Board, two representatives from the architectural profession, and two representatives from schools of architecture. The costs for the attendance by the Government official to the one day meeting in Brussels are approximately £500. The Committee has recently considered the compliance of university courses on architecture in member states with Directive 85/384/EEC, and in particular a number of Spanish diplomas.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Commission Document 5685–02).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances (Seveso II) is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply. 
	The European Commission has established a Committee of Competent Authorities (CCA) for the Seveso Directive under article 19 of the Directive.
	The mandate of the CCA is to promote coherent implementation and consistent application of the provision of the Directive throughout the Community. This necessitates close co-operation of the competent authorities of all member states and the European Commission. the CCA consists of representatives of the member states and the Commission services. It discusses issues concerning the implementation of the Seveso II Directive.
	The committee meets twice a year and is attended on behalf of the UK by representatives of the Health and Safety Executive and the Environment Agency. Where appropriate officials from other relevant Departments also attend. It is estimated that the annual cost to public funds in the UK is approximately £3,000.
	Recent meetings of the CCA have considered the role of the European Commission's major accident hazards bureau, implementation issues of the Seveso Directive in member states, land use planning issues around major hazard installations and relevant research. The comitology committee provided for by Article 22 of the Seveso Directive on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances has not met over the last 12 months.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the implementation of the Community framework for co-cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

David Jamieson: I have been asked to reply.
	The Management Committee on Marine Pollution is established under Decision No. 2850/2000/EC of 20/12/2000 of the European Parliament and the Council setting up a community framework for co-operation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution. This framework has been established for the period 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2006. The committee is composed of representatives of member states and is chaired by the European Commission.
	The aim of the committee is to:
	a) support and supplement member states' efforts;
	b) contribute to improving the capabilities of the member states for response in case of incidents;
	c) strengthen the conditions for and facilitate efficient mutual assistance and co-operation;
	d) promote co-operation among member states in order to provide for compensation for damage in accordance with the polluter-pays principle.
	The UK is represented by officials from my Department and the annual cost of its work to public funds is about £1,500. The committee is presently considering training courses in oil pollution for member states.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the adaptation to technical progress and for the implementation of the Directive on contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply.
	The Committee for adaptation to technical progress and implementation of the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms (GMMs) Directive (90/219/ EEC as amended by 98/81/EC) is mandated to consider information on the
	techniques and methods of genetic modification excluded from the Directive;
	elements to be considered and procedures to be followed in the assessment of the harmful effects of GMMs;
	containment and other protective measures required;
	requirements for notification to the Competent Authorities on premises and activities where GMMs are being used; and
	the types of GMMs considered to be safe to human health and the environment.
	This committee consists of representatives from all member states and the European Commission. Officials from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) attend on behalf of the UK. This committee meets on an ad hoc basis. There have been no meetings in the last year, and no meetings are timetabled for the immediate future. Considerable effort has already taken place in developing the technical information underpinning this Directive. The secretariat to the committee would be provided by the European Commission, which provides interpreting services etc. The European Commission would also pay the travel expenses of the UK representatives. Any potential costs to UK public funds would therefore consist largely of the accommodation costs for the staff attending meetings and their salary costs.
	If any changes to the Directive were proposed, HSE would seek advice from the Health and Safety Commission's tripartite Advisory Committee on Genetic Modification (ACGM). Agendas and papers for ACGM meetings are fully available to the public.
	Also, together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agenda and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the mandate of the Committee for the implementation of the Directive relating to the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and carbon dioxide emissions in respect of the marketing of new passenger cars is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

David Jamieson: I have been asked to reply.
	The mandate of the committee is set out in Article 9 of Directive 1999/94/EC which deals with the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions in respect to the marketing of new passenger cars. The function of the committee is to deliver prompt adjustment of the detailed requirements of the Annexes to the Directive regarding the format of consumer information labels and guides, and the inclusion of fuel economy and CO 2 data in advertising.
	The committee has not met since the adoption of this Directive, and therefore there has, so far, been no cost to public funds. The annual cost of the committee to public funds would be restricted to staff time, their travel and subsistence costs. UK representation would normally be by officials of the Department's Vehicle Standards and Engineering Division.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com(2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Fluorocarbon

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to prohibit the use of partly and fully fluorinated hydrocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride in commercial and industrial processes and consumer products; and if she will make a statement.

Margaret Beckett: holding answer 13 May 2002
	The UK Climate Change Programme published in November 2000 set out our position on hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. Currently, there are no plans to prohibit the general use of fluorinated gases.
	Under the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP), the Environment Council, at its meeting of 12 December 2001, "Welcomed the intention of the (European) Commission, as announced in the ECCP Communication, to make a proposal for a Framework Directive on fluorinated gases, including containment of emissions from stationary and mobile sources, monitoring of quantities of fluorinated gases being placed on the market as well as marketing and use restrictions, where appropriate, for relevant applications where viable alternatives are available and if improvement of containment is not feasible, taking into account existing voluntary initiatives by some fluorinated gases industry sectors, where the development of alternatives is still ongoing."

Composting Licences

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list new licences granted for the composting of waste in the last 12 months.

Margaret Beckett: holding answer 13 May 2002
	In England and Wales, the Environment Agency issued 7 new waste management licences to composting installations between November 2000 and November 2001. The installations were located in Hertfordshire, Lancashire (2), Leicestershire, Somerset, Surrey and the West Midlands. There are 67 licensed composting sites in total, with over 600 smaller installations registered as exemptions. Information on licensed composting installations will shortly be updated to 1 April 2002. Household composting is excluded from any licensing requirement.

Composting Licences

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the draft EU Regulation on Animal By-Products will come into force; and if she has given consideration to the early implementation of those parts of the draft regulation which relate to composting.

Margaret Beckett: holding answer 13 May 2002
	The draft Animal By-Products Regulation has yet to be adopted and it is not clear when it will come into force. However, we expect it to apply in member states in the first half of 2003. We have commissioned a risk assessment on the risks to public, animal and plant health from the land spreading of composted catering waste and animal by-products. In the light of that assessment we will review our current legislation and consider whether this should be amended in advance of the EU Regulation coming into force.

Composting Licences

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures she is taking to facilitate the granting of composting licences.

Margaret Beckett: holding answer 13 May 2002
	When an establishment chooses to apply to the Environment Agency for a composting site license the agency has a series of application and working plan guidance notes to assist in understanding the licensing process. The agency has also issued guidance and risk assessment procedures to help those operating smaller establishments who wish to register exemptions. In addition, the agency recently issued a standard waste management licence pack to those applicants with a low risk impact green waste composting proposal. This allows the use of a simplified application process that results in a speedier processing of the licence application. Finally, the agency has consulted on technical guidance for composting that will be published later this year.

Livestock Premiums

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many people are making claims for (a) sheep and (b) cattle premiums, by regional service centre, broken down by claims for (i) minimum threshold number, (ii) minimum threshold number to 10 animals and (iii) minimum threshold number to 20 animals.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 13 May 2002
	The number of claims received broken down by regional service centre is set out in the table. Cattle premiums are not subject to minimum threshold numbers. For sheep the minimum threshold number is 10 animals.
	
		Latest available number of claims by administrative region
		
			  Sheep premiums Cattle premiums  
			  Number of claims for SAPS (2002) Number of claims for  Number of claims for EPS (2001) Number of claims for SPS (2001) Number of claims for  
			 RPA site 10 animals 11–20 animals BSPS (2001) Simplified Standard Adult Veal SCPS (2001) 
		
		
			 Bristol 42 225 3,771 1,178 1,771 — — 1,654 
			 Cambridge 30 144 1,758 481 681 1,747 4 1,115 
			 Carlisle 32 168 4,796 2,073 2,501 6,404 295 2,514 
			 Crewe 41 210 3,852 1,119 1,515 3,014 247 1,827 
			 Exeter 38 219 6,152 1,673 3,869 9,538 104 3,090 
			 Northallerton 41 229 4,989 1,833 1,912 6,303 18 2,893 
			 Nottingham 42 167 3,592 961 1,634 3,555 57 2,019 
			 Reading 49 257 3,014 1,233 1,599 905 5 1,917 
			 Worcester 52 261 2,935 902 1,511 1,380 6 1,669 
			  
			 Total 367 1,880 34,859 11,453 16,993 32,846 736 18,698

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what the level of nitrates were in rivers in each year since 1990, broken down by (a) region and (b) river; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what assessment has been made by her Department of nitrate levels in rivers; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: In England and Wales the Environment Agency's general quality assessment (GQA) scheme is used to classify water quality in rivers and canals. Figures showing changes in quality against a baseline of 1990 are published each year by the Environment Agency. Results for Scotland are collected by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and in Northern Ireland by the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland.
	Chemical quality is assessed on the basis of biochemical oxygen demand and concentrations of dissolved oxygen and ammonia. Stretches of rivers and canals are classed as good, fair, poor or bad based on different degrees of chemical quality.
	Phosphates and nitrates are measured to determine the average concentrations of nutrients in rivers. Each monitored river stretch is assigned one of six grades from 1 (very low) to 6 (excessively high for phosphate, very high for nitrate). The grade assigned to the water is based on three years of sampling.
	Since the Environment Agency monitors water quality at about 7,000 sites representing 40,000 km of rivers and canals in England and Wales it would be impractical to list the results in the detail requested. However, they can be supplied electronically on application to the Environment Agency. In addition the Environment Agency website has a section called "What's in your backyard" which enables anyone with an interest in a particular river to obtain all available monitoring results for the particular stretch from 1990 to 2000. The website address is www.environment-agency.gov.uk.
	The following table summarises the results of assessments since 1990.
	
		percentage length 
		
			 GQA: nutrient status—nitrate 1995 2000 
		
		
			 1 17.6 15.7 
			 2 14.7 12.6 
			 3 19.7 21.1 
			 4 17.7 18.8 
			 5 15.1 15.9 
			 6 15.2 15.8 
			 High 30.3 31.7

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  if she will make a statement on (a) the levels of phosphorous in and (b) the quality of rivers in each year since 1990; if she will break the information down (i) by region and (ii) by river; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what assessment has been made by her Department of levels of phosphorous in rivers; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: In England and Wales the Environment Agency's general quality assessment (GQA) scheme is used to classify water quality in rivers and canals. Figures showing changes in quality against a baseline of 1990 are published each year by the Environment Agency. Results for Scotland are collected by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and in Northern Ireland by the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland.
	Chemical quality is assessed on the basis of biochemical oxygen demand and concentrations of dissolved oxygen and ammonia. Stretches of rivers and canals are classed as good, fair, poor or bad based on different degrees of chemical quality.
	Phosphates and nitrates are measured to determine the average concentrations of nutrients in rivers. Each monitored river stretch is assigned one of six grades from 1 (very low) to 6 (excessively high for phosphate, very high for nitrate). The grade assigned to the water is based on three years of sampling.
	Since the Environment Agency monitors water quality at about 7,000 sites representing 40,000 km of rivers and canals in England and Wales it would be impractical to list the results in the detail requested. However, they can be supplied electronically on application to the Environment Agency. In addition the Environment Agency website has a section called "What's in your backyard" which enables anyone with an interest in a particular river to obtain all available monitoring results for the particular stretch from 1990 to 2000. The website address is www.environment-agency.gov.uk.
	The following table summarises the results of assessments since 1990.
	
		percentage length 
		
			 GQA: nutrient status—phosphate 1990 1995 2000 
		
		
			 1 8.0 14.8 14.0 
			 2 17.7 22.7 21.4 
			 3 10.3 11.0 10.1 
			 4 13.1 13.3 15.1 
			 5 28.0 27.4 28.9 
			 6 22.9 10.9 10.6 
			 High 64.0 51.6 54.5

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment (a) has been and (b) is being made of the impact of the water framework directive and what measures will be required as a result; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: An assessment of the costs and benefits of implementing the directive was set out in the first consultation paper issued jointly by the then Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the National Assembly for Wales in March 2001. This partial regulatory impact assessment estimated total costs for England and Wales in the range of £2 billion to £9.2 billion: benefits in the range of £1.6 billion to £6.2 billion. A copy of the paper is in the House Library.
	We will consult on measures necessary under the directive in a second consultation paper this year.
	An updated regulatory impact assessment will form part of a third consultation paper on implementation of the directive in England and Wales, planned for 2003.
	Implementation of the directive in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and with respect to the devolved functions in Wales, are matters for the Scottish Executive, the Northern Ireland Executive and the National Assembly for Wales.

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made by her Department of the quality of rivers; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: In England and Wales the Environment Agency's General Quality Assessment (GQA) scheme is used to classify water quality in rivers and canals. Figures showing changes in quality against a baseline of 1990 are published each year by the Environment Agency. Results for Scotland are collected by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and in Northern Ireland by the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland.
	The GQA also reports on the aesthetic quality of rivers. This includes: litter on the banks and in the river; sewage derived waste such as sanitary towels and cotton buds; the colour and smell of the water; oil, scum, foam, sewage fungus and ochreous deposits; and dog fouling.
	Biological quality is assessed by comparing the populations of macroinvertebrates found in samples taken twice a year at each sampling site, with the population that would normally be found in unpolluted waters with the same physical characteristics. Stretches of rivers and canals are classed as very good, good, fairly good, fair, poor or bad.
	
		GQA: Summary results for England and Wales
		
			  A B C D E F Good or Fair Poor or Bad 
		
		
			 GQA: chemistry quality (percentage length) 
			 1990 17.6 30.2 23.2 14.0 12.7 2.3 84.9 15.1 
			 1995 26.9 32.7 21.0 10.3 8.1 1.0 91.0 9.0 
			 1996 27.2 31.2 21.3 10.4 8.8 1.0 90.2 9.8 
			 1997 26.3 30.5 21.4 10.8 9.9 1.0 89.0 11.0 
			 1998 27.6 31.5 20.2 10.7 9.3 0.7 90.0 10.0 
			 1999 29.1 34.2 19.6 9.2 7.5 0.6 91.9 8.1 
			 2000 31.9 35.8 18.9 7.7 5.4 0.4 94.2 5.8 
			 GQA: biological quality (percentage length) 
			 1990 24.0 31.6 21.6 9.8 7.3 5.7 87.0 13.0 
			 1995 34.6 31.6 18.4 8.1 5.4 1.9 92.6 7.4 
			 2000 34.6 32.3 19.8 7.6 4.8 0.9 94.3 5.7

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will place in the Library a copy of the speech she made to Water UK on 2 May on the Water Framework Directive; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: A copy of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's speech to Water UK was placed in the Library today. During her speech my right hon. Friend announced the Government's response to the consultation on the draft Water Bill, a copy of which was placed in the Library on 2 May.

Water Quality

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what European Directives relate to levels of nitrates in groundwater; what steps (a) have been taken and (b) are planned to meet the deadlines of such Directives; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The Nitrates Directive and Water Framework Directive both relate in part to levels of nitrate in groundwater.
	The Nitrates Directive aims to protect waters from nitrate pollution from agricultural land. It requires identification of groundwaters that contain, or could contain if preventative action is not taken, more than 50mg/l nitrates. In 1996, England designated 59 Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZs) specifically for the protection of groundwaters. Since 1998, farmers within NVZs have been required to apply Action Programme measures to limit organic manure and inorganic nitrogen fertiliser use.
	A European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgment in 2000 held that the UK had failed to designate sufficient NVZs for the protection of all waters. A recent consultation outlined two options for implementing the Nitrates Directive, both of which would extend the protection of groundwater in England. We are currently carefully considering the responses made to this consultation and will announce a decision in due course.
	In the future, the Water Framework Directive will add further force to this protection because it requires that member states aim to achieve good groundwater status for all bodies of groundwater within 15 years of the Directive coming into force. The Commission is currently developing specific measures to prevent and control groundwater pollution, which will complement the provisions of existing Directives.

Recycling

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what role recycling credits have in ensuring businesses meet recycling targets; what assessment her Department has made of their impact on local authorities, businesses and charitable organisations; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what representations her Department has received from (a) local authorities, (b) the Association of Charity Shops and (c) businesses; and what discussions it has had with other organisations regarding the role and impact of recycling credits in meeting recycling targets; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: Under section 52 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 waste disposal authorities are required to pay waste collection authorities recycling credits for all waste which the latter recycle. The value of the recycling credit should be equal to the saving the disposal authority makes through not having to dispose of the recycled material.
	Local authorities have the option (but not a duty) to pay recycling credits to third parties (businesses, charities and community groups) collecting waste for recycling. Practice among local authorities varies, but I am aware that a number have a policy of not paying recycling credits to businesses.
	I have had no specific representations from, or discussions with, the groups mentioned on the issue of recycling credits, nor has my Department carried out an assessment of their impact on them. However, "Waste Strategy 2000" recognised that the current scheme in England and Wales might in some cases work against the closer working relationships between collection and disposal authorities and other interested parties which the national strategy advocates. The Government are committed to reviewing the recycling credits scheme to see whether incentives for the promotion of recycling can be improved. In so doing we will consult fully with relevant parties, including those listed.

Water Industry

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what changes she proposes to the regulation of the water industry; if her preparatory work included consideration of their effect on sustainable development; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The main changes proposed to the regulation of the water industry are contained in the draft Water Bill, which has sustainability as a central theme. The Government response to the consultation was published on 2 May and the Bill will be introduced as soon as parliamentary time allows.
	The Water Bill contains changes to the water abstraction authorisation system to ensure that water is used sustainably. It also aims to put consumers at the heart of regulation of the water industry, through mechanisms such as the creation of an independent Consumer Council for Water and requiring companies to make clear any links between directors' pay and company performance. The Bill also includes proposals to give the Director General of Water Services a specific sustainable development duty.
	Any future regulatory measures that are needed to ensure compliance with obligations in new European Community water quality legislation will be fully consulted on with the water industry and other stakeholders.

Water Industry

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what consultations (a) have been undertaken and (b) are planned by her Department relating to the water industry; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: Since May 2001 there have been the following formal consultations relating specifically to the water industry:
	How should England implement the 1991 Nitrates Directive? (February 2002)
	Draft Guidance on the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000 (March 2002)
	Water Grid PPP: Removal of Restrictions on British Waterways Statutory Powers (May 2002).
	The Department also intends over the coming months to undertake further formal consultations on the following subjects:
	competition in the Water Industry
	revisions to the Vulnerable Groups Scheme
	implementation of the Water Framework Directive
	requirements in Article 16 of the Water Framework Directive regarding the Priority List daughter directives
	implementation of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive in respect of certain water resource projects
	water industry and environment policy document.
	Aside from formal consultations, Ministers and officials from DEFRA have frequent contact and discussions with a wide range of stakeholders in the water industry.

Sick Leave

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many days of sick leave were taken in her Department last year; how many related to employees suffering (a) stress and (b) other mental health problems; and what the cost was to her Department.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 14 May 2002
	Records are not yet available for the number of days sickness absence in 2001. In 2000, the latest year for which records are available, an average of 9 days per staff year were taken by employees in what was then the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, including its agencies. These figures are published in the Cabinet Office annual report "Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service", copies of which are placed in House Libraries.
	The report does not separately identify stress and other mental health related absences, and the Department is able to obtain these figures and put a cost to these cases only at disproportionate cost.
	The Department is committed to meeting its targets for reducing the number of working days lost due to sickness absence, which are contained in the published Service Delivery Agreement. The Department is also committed to reducing the number of working days lost from work-related injury and ill health arising from the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.

EU Meetings

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on how many occasions in the last six months (a) she and (b) her officials have met their Italian counterparts; and what subjects were discussed.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	My ministerial colleagues and I regularly meet with our Italian counterparts at meetings of the Agriculture, Fisheries and Environment Councils. Similarly, my officials have regular contacts with their Italian counterparts at meetings in Brussels. Two of my senior officials travelled to Rome earlier this month for a meeting to discuss CAP reform and the forthcoming mid-term review of Agenda 2000.

EU Meetings

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to discuss reform of the Common Agricultural Policy with her French counterpart; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has written to her new French counterpart congratulating him on his appointment and suggesting an early meeting to discuss this and other key issues. She also looks forward to meeting him in the Agriculture Council on 27 May.

EU Meetings

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions she has had with the Spanish presidency regarding the agenda for her meeting with her EU counterparts in Mallorca; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 16 May 2002
	No DEFRA Ministers, including myself, have had discussions or meetings with the presidency regarding the informal meeting of Environment Ministers on 24–26 May in Mallorca. The presidency decides the topic for informal ministerial meetings and has chosen soil protection. Its paper "Policy for the integrated protection of soil quality" will steer the discussion, but this has yet to emerge. Although my officials have not had a meeting with the presidency to discuss the agenda for the informal meeting of Ministers, they met on 4 April to discuss the Thematic Strategy for Soil. This will be an output of the sixth Environmental Action Programme, which is expected to be adopted shortly.

Temporary Staff

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the cost to her Department was of employing staff in (a) London and (b) the south-east from employment agencies in each year since 1997.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	The Department has only been in existence since June 2001, so does not have such historical information. Constructing it retrospectively would involve disproportionate cost.

Imported Meat

Harry Barnes: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what imports of meat there were in the last 12 months into the United Kingdom from nations which have not adopted equivalent legislative controls to those banning the use of certain growth promoters within the European Union; and what controls are in place to prevent the importation of such meat.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	In accordance with harmonised Community legislation, the importation into the EU of fresh meat derived from animals which have been treated with certain substances, including hormonal growth promoters, is not permitted.
	All meat imported into the UK from third countries must enter at designated UK Border Inspection Posts (BIPs) where it is subject to veterinary inspections. All consignments are subject to documentary and identity checks and at least 20 per cent. of consignments undergo physical checks, which may include sampling. These ensure import conditions are met and that the products remain in a satisfactory condition during transport.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many claims for work-related illness were settled by her Department in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was in compensation.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The most recent statistics available are for the year 2000 and relate to the former Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) and its agencies; the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) was not created until June 2001.
	Records show that in the core Department, there was one case where compensation was awarded for work- related illness, at a cost of £2,000. There were no cases in the Central Science Laboratory (CSL) and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS) agencies. There was one case in the Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA).
	Letter from Professor Steven Edwards to Mr. Michael Clapham, dated May 2002
	The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question on how many claims for work-related illness were settled by her Department in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was in compensation.
	The VLA is committed to providing a safe and healthy working environment for staff, is proactive in monitoring procedures and ensures that comprehensive advice and guidance is available to all staff and managers.
	VLA is also committed to meeting targets for reducing the number of working days lost generally to work related injuries and illness arising from the Government Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.
	No claims for work-related illness were settled in 2000.
	One claim for a work-related accident was settled in 2000. The total cost of this compensation case was £56,073.09—broken down as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 Settlement 30,000.00 
			 Costs 26,000.00 
			 Additional travel costs and interest 73.09 
		
	
	Letter from Professor Mike Roberts to Mr. Michael Clapham, dated 21 May 2002
	The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has asked me to reply, in respect of the Central Science Laboratory, to your question concerning how many claims for work-related illness were settled in the last year for which records are available, and what the cost was in compensation.
	There were no claims for work-related illness at CSL in the last year.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many days of sick leave were taken by employees in her Department in the last year for which records are available; what proportion of those were due to work-related illness or injury; and what the cost was to the Department.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 20 May 2002
	In 2000, the latest year for which records are available, an average of nine days per staff year were taken by employees in what was then the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, including its agencies. These figures are published in the Cabinet Office annual report "Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service", copies of which are placed in House Libraries.
	The Department does not hold figures on the proportion of these absences that were due to work-related illness or injury, or the cost of these absences, and these could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	The Department is committed to meeting its targets for reducing the number of working days lost due to sickness absence, which are contained in the published Service Delivery Agreement. The Department is also committed to reducing the number of working days lost from work-related injury and ill health, in response to the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many employees of her Department retired through work-related ill-health in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was to the Department.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Records are not maintained by the Department which enable ill health retirements to be separately identified as work-related. The number of staff retired with a medical retirement certificate issued by the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (PCSPS) medical adviser for the period 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001, was 20. Benefits provided on medical retirement are as set out in the rules of the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme and laid before Parliament, and provide for an immediate payment of an enhanced pension and lump sum. Ill-health retirement expenditure is met centrally from the Civil Superannuation Vote. For the year ending March 2002, provisional expenditure from the vote was £310 million in respect of all civil service cases for which an ill-health pension has been awarded. These cases number approximately 67,000 and include those who have formerly been ill-health retired but who have now reached and exceeded the normal retirement age.
	This reply covers staff of the Intervention Board and the former MAFF and its agencies who joined DEFRA in June last year following Machinery of Government changes, but does not include the former DETR staff who are now part of DEFRA.

New Forest National Park

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she intends to call a local inquiry to consider the Designation Order for a New Forest National Park.

Margaret Beckett: Under schedule 1 to the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, an inquiry must be held into the Designation Order if a local authority has objected and the objection has not been withdrawn. Several local authorities have lodged objections, which are being maintained. A letter is being sent to all those who have made objections or representations, advising them that a local inquiry is to be held and what the scope of the inquiry will be. A copy of the letter is in the Library of the House. The inquiry is expected to start in October.

Sewage Treatment

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will take steps to clarify the powers which local authorities have to act in respect of smell nuisance from sewage treatment works.

Michael Meacher: Pursuant to the answer given to my hon. Friend on 4 February 2002, Official Report, column 749W, the information provided should be properly clarified. Local authorities are not able to use their powers under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 as previous case law has deemed that public sewers and sewage treatment works cannot be considered "premises" within the context of that Act. My officials are exploring the available legislation and existing controls as a possible means to deal with odour nuisance from sewage treatment works in the future.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Parliamentary Staff

Kevin McNamara: To ask the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), representing the House of Commons Commission, how many specialist advisers have been employed since 1997 by each select committee; what was the duration of their contract and scale of remuneration; in each case, whether the post was openly advertised; what the total cost of special advisers was, broken down by committee; and if he will break down the numbers of special advisers by (a) sex and (b) ethnic origin.

Archy Kirkwood: Lists of specialist advisers appointed by each select committee in the last Parliament and their cost are contained in the Sessional Returns ordered to be printed by the House on 25 January 1999 (HC142), 16 December 1999 (HC1), 5 February 2001 (HC100) and 20 July 2001 (HC1). The equivalent information so far in the current Session is being assembled and will be placed in the Library.
	The arrangements for the selection of candidates are the responsibility of individual select committees, not of the House of Commons Commission. Committees normally appoint specialist advisers for a particular subject or a particular inquiry. Typically, an appointment remains valid until the end of a Parliament in case a committee returns to a subject. Specialist advisers are not House employees but are paid as contractors. Details of duration of their appointment and scale of remuneration are collated by each committee separately. Daily rates, which are currently under review, range up to £150. As specialist advisers are not employees of the House, we have no separate record by gender and ethnic origin.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Malawi

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions she has had with her EU colleagues regarding the EU's response to the food shortages in Malawi.

Clare Short: My officials in Lilongwe are in regular contact with the two other member states represented in Malawi (Denmark and Germany) as well as the EC delegation. The Danes are withdrawing from Malawi and have not therefore been active in helping to provide food. Neither have the Germans (who argue that their contribution is through the EC).
	The EC have now agreed to purchase 40,000 tonnes of maize from the local market to replenish National Food Reserve Agency stocks. This will be held until the lean season (starting October) and then released for distribution to those in need. A further 10,000 tonnes will be purchased internationally. The EC are preparing a proposal seeking financial contributions from all member states to finance another 30,000 tonnes of maize to be procured internationally.

Nepal

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what development programmes and financial support have been provided to Nepal in the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

Clare Short: UK development assistance to Nepal in each of the last five years is as follows:
	
		
			  £000 
		
		
			 1997–98 17,280 
			 1998–99 16,627 
			 1999–2000 15,989 
			 2000–01 17,165 
			 2001–02 20,400 
		
	
	Note:
	The figure for 2001–02 is provisional
	This development assistance has been spent on programmes to:
	(i) Improve governance, through a programme to strengthen governance and build pressure for change, through support to implement effectively the Government's decentralisation programme, and for effective management of public finances.
	(ii) Enhance human development, through support for secondary education and community literacy, and through support for safer motherhood services, commodity support to the national TB programme and to family planning, and programme support to polio eradication in Nepal and to the national AIDS programme.
	(iii) Strengthen approaches to rural livelihoods including better physical access, through programmes to enhance rural access, agricultural productivity, community forestry management, by strengthening capacity to tackle deep-seated problems such as bonded labour, and through community-based and area-based poverty alleviation projects.
	The worsening conflict situation in Nepal has restricted some development activities, though work is continuing in many areas. Over the past six months my officials have been developing a number of short-term initiatives to deliver development benefits to people in conflict-affected areas.

Illegal Logging

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what financial support she gives to developing countries to help them combat illegal logging.

Clare Short: holding answer 16 May 2002
	Worldwide we spend just under £20 million from DFID's country programme budgets on helping countries improve their forest governance and move towards more equitable and sustainable forest management. This strengthens the capacity of Governments, NGOs and local communities to enforce forest law.
	Roughly 5 per cent. of this support specifically targets better documentation and understanding of the problem of illegal logging, as well as the establishment of improved monitoring and transparency in countries.
	Over the past three years we have also contributed a total of about £450,000 from our central policy budget to supporting global dialogue and information exchange on the underlying causes of deforestation, some of which is caused by illegal logging, and helping countries come together to agree policy action.
	We are providing £300,000 to Global Forest Watch, which is based in the World Resources Institute. Last year we were active in sponsoring, jointly with the US State Department and the World Bank institute, a regional ministerial conference on forest law enforcement and governance in Indonesia, where the private sector, East Asia Governments and civil society came together to generate political will and agree policy action. We contributed £39,464 to the costs. We will jointly sponsor similar initiatives in Africa and Latin America over the coming two years.

Afghanistan

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will place in the Library the report from UNMAS on their programme of visits to sites where cluster bombs were dropped in Afghanistan; and if she will make a statement.

Clare Short: holding answer 20 May 2002
	We understand from the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) that there is no specific report currently available on its programme of visits. Field survey data is currently being collected on behalf of UNMAS as access becomes available. This information is available to humanitarian demining personnel in Afghanistan on the Mine Action Centre for Afghanistan (MACA) database.

Middle East

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the UK contribution to European Union and World Bank activities in Israel has been for each of the past 10 years (a) by monetary value, (b) in terms of percentage of activity total and (c) in terms of percentage of her Department's annual spending total; and if she will make a statement.

Clare Short: Israel's level of economic development is relatively high. Israel is not therefore a recipient of UK, EC or World Bank development assistance.

WALES

Unpaid Advisers

Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, pursuant to the answer of 10 April, Official Report, column 6W, what the (a) names and (b) responsibilities are of unpaid advisers who have assisted the work of his Department since June 1997 but are not included in the Cabinet Office's annual report 'Task Forces, Ad Hoc Advisory Groups and Reviews 2000–01'.

Paul Murphy: My Department came into existence on 1 July 1999. It has not had any assistance from unpaid advisers.

Fraud

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what the estimated level of losses to fraud and corruption was in (a) his Department's Vote 1 budget and (b) his Department's Vote 2 budget for (i) 1999–2000 and (ii) 2000–01.

Paul Murphy: No losses have been identified for these years.

Access to Information

Tony Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the administrative manuals and internal guidance which his Department has made public as required by Part 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information; and which of these were first made available after May 1997.

Paul Murphy: The Wales Office has very few executive functions and so has published no supplementary material. It is producing a Publication Scheme under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

TRANSPORT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE REGIONS

Affordable Housing

Oona King: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what measures he is taking to increase the supply of affordable housing in London.

Sally Keeble: Increasing the supply of affordable housing is a key priority of the Government, and the problem in London is of particular concern.
	The Government has recently announced that the Housing Corporation's Approved Development Programme (ADP) allocation for London will be £545 million. This includes an additional £95 million which will fund an extra 1,363 units. London will also receive £146 million of the Starter Home Initiative funding, which will help 4,600 of London's key workers.

Abandoned Properties

Stephen Ladyman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to help local authorities deal with privately owned abandoned properties.

Sally Keeble: The Government are taking action to deal with empty and abandoned properties in areas of both high and low demand. The measures in place, which are set out in detail in our recent response to the Select Committee report on empty homes, include: funding the Empty Homes Agency to help local authorities bring empty properties back into use; reforming private sector renewal legislation; and introducing pathfinder projects, backed by £25 million of investment, to tackle low demand where the problem is most acute.

Parish Councils

Andrew Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what recent representations he has received concerning the new arrangements for registration of interests by parish councillors.

David Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what recent representations he has had from parish councils about the introduction of the new code of conduct.

Alan Whitehead: Since the New Year, there have been 268 representations received by my Department about the model code of conduct for parishes.

Parish Councils

Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what measures the Government are undertaking to encourage public participation in parish councils.

Alan Whitehead: The Government are encouraging public engagement with, and participation in local democracy across, all tiers of local government, including parish councils.
	The consultation paper on Quality Parish and Town councils took forward a key aim of the rural White Paper "Our Countryside: the Future—a Fair Deal for Rural England", that is to help parish councils develop a new role in giving the communities they serve the opportunity to help shape their future. In order to gain quality status, we are proposing that parish councils will need to pass six tests, for instance to show that their seats have been filled by members who have been democratically elected and that they are holding a minimum number of open council meetings.
	The Government are also providing £5 million to help 1,000 rural communities develop town or village plans that will set out the facilities and services they need.

Rail Services, Hassocks

Howard Flight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on progress in his negotiations with the train operating companies on railway services to Hassocks, West Sussex.

David Jamieson: The Strategic Rail Authority is currently negotiating the new South Central franchise agreement and hopes to reach a conclusion to these negotiations by September 2002.

Local Government Finance

Bill O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what weighting factors will be given to poverty and health factors in the new local government financing system.

Nick Raynsford: We are working to develop options for a fairer and more intelligible grant distribution system. We will consult on options over the summer and will consider the detailed responses when we come to take decisions.

Local Government Finance

Michael Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what progress is being made towards replacing the Standard Spending Assessment.

Alan Whitehead: We are working to develop options for a fairer and more intelligible grant distribution system. We will consult on options over the summer and will consider the responses when we come to take decisions.

Local Government Finance

Paddy Tipping: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he last met representatives of the F40 group of authorities to discuss the grant distribution system for 2003–04.

Alan Whitehead: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State met representatives of the F40 group of authorities on Tuesday 14 May 2002 to discuss this issue.

Uniform Business Rate

David Heath: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to reform the uniform business rate.

Alan Whitehead: Our proposals for business rates in England are set out in the Local Government White Paper "Strong Local Leadership Quality Public Services", published on 11 December. It includes among other proposals our new schemes for rate relief for small businesses and Business Improvement Districts.

Regional Planning Authorities

Desmond Swayne: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to extend the role of regional planning authorities.

Sally Keeble: We propose to strengthen regional planning by replacing Regional Planning Guidance with Regional Spatial Strategies. These would have statutory status and focus on strategic issues. These will be more fully integrated with other regional strategies and have an important sub-regional dimension.

Downing Street Transport Seminar

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to what extent the seminar in No. 10 Downing Street chaired by Ms C. Booth QC in February has assisted in the formulation of transport policy; and if he will make a statement.

John Spellar: The Downing Street lectures are not policy-making seminars, and Mrs. Blair does not chair them. I attended the lecture given by Jeremy Acklam (Smart Economy, Smart Transport) and welcomed his thoughts on the potential gains from better transport information and technology.
	For general information on the lectures, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Baker) on 15 May 2002, Official Report, column 712–15W.

Regional Airports (Rail Links)

Mark Lazarowicz: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what steps he is taking to improve rail links to regional airports.

David Jamieson: The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) is working with a number of airport operators, and in the case of Glasgow and Edinburgh airports alongside the Scottish Executive, in the development of proposals to improve rail links to regional airports.

Regional Assemblies

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the financing of regional assemblies.

Alan Whitehead: Our policy on the financing of regional assemblies was set out in chapter 5 of our White Paper, "Your Region, Your Choice", which was published on Thursday 9 May 2002.

Regional Assemblies

David Cameron: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the introduction of regional assemblies.

Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on regional assemblies.

Alan Whitehead: The Government's policy on establishing elected assemblies in the English regions was set out in the White Paper "Your Region, Your Choice" (Cm 5511), which was published on 9 May.

Regional Assemblies

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what his policy is on the role of regional assemblies in respect of development policies.

Alan Whitehead: Our policy is set out in Chapters 2 and 4 of the White Paper, "Your Region, Your Choice", which was published on 9 May.

Regional Assemblies

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what estimates he has made of the cost of introducing regional government in England; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: The cost of establishing elected regional assemblies was discussed in paragraphs 5.12 to 5.16 of our White Paper, Your Region, Your Choice, published on 9 May.

Light Railway Systems

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to fund the installation of tram and light railway systems in smaller towns.

Sally Keeble: As I explained to the hon. Member at our meeting on 1 May, our ten-year plan reflects our commitment to light rail in major cities. Whether light rail offers the most appropriate and cost-effective response to transport needs in other circumstances is a matter, in the first instance, for the local authorities concerned to consider in formulating and reviewing their local transport plans. Thereafter, any light rail scheme or other major transport project would need to undergo rigorous appraisal and examination under any relevant statutory procedures before funding approval could be considered.

Regeneration

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what steps he is taking to regenerate areas of deprivation.

Sally Keeble: We are continuing to tackle deprivation. The National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal has gathered widespread acceptance from all key stakeholders. Even though the strategy is a long-term initiative, we are already beginning to see early wins for our poorest communities through programmes such as Neighbourhood Wardens, Street Wardens and the New Deal for Communities.

Aviation Industry

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on projected growth in passenger and flight numbers in the aviation industry over the next 10 years.

David Jamieson: The Department's latest air traffic forecasts for the UK published in 2000 show the total passenger demand at UK airports increasing by 6 per cent. a year from 160 million passengers in 1998 to 276 million in 2010. The Department does not make forecasts of the number of flights.

Planning Reform

Mark Francois: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he intends to introduce legislation to reform the planning process.

Sally Keeble: Following consideration of the responses to the Green Paper consultation we would hope to press ahead as soon as possible with those reforms requiring legislation, subject to parliamentary time being available.

Children's Play Facilities

Claire Ward: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what proposals he has for improving children's play facilities in towns and cities.

Sally Keeble: The Urban Green Spaces Taskforce, which was set up in January 2001 to provide advice on policies for improving urban parks, play areas and green spaces, published its final report: Green Spaces, Better Places on Tuesday 7 May 2002. We will respond to the conclusions and recommendations of this report in a policy statement later this summer.

Local Authority Housing Stock Transfers

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how much has been set aside for debt write-off connected to large scale transfers of council housing stock (a) in respect of properties already transferred and (b) to cover planned transfers.

Sally Keeble: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Mr. Hopkins) on Friday 12 April 2002, Official Report, column 628W.

Public Transport (Heathrow)

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what his assessment is of the impact Terminal 5's extra passengers will have on M4 traffic to the west of Heathrow; and how he intends to improve public transport to Heathrow from the west.

David Jamieson: Public transport access and impact on the road network were considered at length during the Terminal 5 inquiry. In approving Terminal 5, the Secretary of State decided that questions about widening the M4 in the Heathrow area and improving Junctions 3 and 4 should be referred to the London to Reading Multi-Modal Study. The Strategic Rail Authority is actively working with BAA to develop proposals for rail service improvements including the possibility of new and improved rail links to the west.

Housing Market Renewal Fund

Louise Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what progress has been made in setting up a housing market renewal fund.

Sally Keeble: We are making excellent progress in pursuing our objective to turn round the incidence of low demand by 2010.
	Last month my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions announced that we are inviting nine areas to work with the Government in developing pathfinders to tackle low demand and abandoned housing.
	Last Thursday my right hon. Friend announced that £25 million was being made available from the Capital Modernisation Fund for investment in the nine pathfinder areas. This will enable each pathfinder to start early the process of preparing a strategic plan and inform future investment.

Local Election Turnouts

Andrew Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what evaluation has been made of pilot schemes to encourage higher turnout in local elections.

Alan Whitehead: The Electoral Commission began its evaluation of the pilot schemes on 3 May and will report to the Secretary of State by 2 August 2002. The evaluation will provide a detailed assessment of the impact of new voting methods on election turnout and voting.
	Early indications are that postal voting has boosted turnout and the various electronic means of voting have been positively received.

Council Tax

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has for the reform of the operation of council tax.

Alan Whitehead: In our White Paper "Strong Local Leadership—Quality Public Services", published last December, we set out our plans for the council tax. These include first revaluation in 2007 with 10-yearly revaluations thereafter; giving local authorities discretion on discounts and exemptions; and not using the reserve capping powers for high performing authorities.

Road Works

Nigel Beard: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what steps he is taking to regulate road works on major roads.

Sally Keeble: We are introducing a range of regulatory measures to deal with disruption to road users caused by works on the street. In particular, last April we introduced powers allowing highway authorities to levy charges on utility works which are not completed to deadline. We are also piloting powers allowing authorities to levy "lane rental" on utilities for the whole duration of their works.
	As to maintenance work carried out on trunk roads, the Highways Agency aims to keep to a minimum disruption caused by such works; for example, wherever possible routine maintenance is undertaken outside peak hours.

London Underground

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what assumptions underlie the capital value of the London Underground public-private partnership capital value as stated in table C18 of Financial Statement and Budget report 2002 (HC592); and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: The Financial Statement and Budget report 2002 as a whole is of course a matter for HM Treasury. Table C18 of the report refers to the £16 billion of investment and maintenance in the tube that the London Underground public-private partnerships are expected to deliver over the next 15 years. This estimate, which is in April 2002 prices, is consistent with the preferred bids for the PPP contracts. The figure is also consistent with the guidance for reporting the information in table C18 as set out in Treasury Taskforce Policy Statement (Number 5).

Local Government Officers

Doug Naysmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on progress made on the review of political restrictions on local government officers;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on his proposals to alter the political restrictions on local government officers in England and Wales.

Alan Whitehead: We will shortly be starting the review process looking at political restrictions on local government officers and intend to publish a consultation paper containing proposals later this year.

Infrastructure Charging Research

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, 
	(1)  pursuant to his answer of 30 April 2002, Official Report, column 675W, on infrastructure charging research, if he will publish figures for the cost of research commissioned by his Department, or the DETR, in each year since 1997; if he will publish the estimated cost for the forthcoming year; and if he will publish a summary of the work so far on (a) user acceptance, (b) social-spatial inclusion and exclusion, (c) trade-off between practical and optimal cordon congestion charging and (d) economic geography of congestion charging;
	(2)  pursuant to his answer of 30 April 2002, Official Report, column 675W, on infrastructure charging research, when the commissioned work will terminate; and what the estimated cost of such research is up to the termination date;
	(3)  if he will make a statement on the assessment he has made of the effect of congestion charging on social-spatial inclusion and exclusion.

Stephen Byers: The annual spend, total spend and likely termination date for the projects listed in the answer of 30 April 2002, Official Report, column 675W is given in the following table:
	
		£000 
		
			  Actual annual spend Forecast spend   
			 Project title 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 Totals End 
		
		
			 Demonstration of Interoperable Charging and Telematics Systems — — — — 2,600 7,000 9,000 3,400 22,000 December 2004 
			 Dynamic Freight Analysis — — — — 11 32 12 — 55 April 2004 
			 Economic Geography of Congestion Charging — — 12 13 16 4 — — 45 December 2003 
			 Trade-off between practical and optimal cordon congestion charging — — — 6 5 6 — — 17 December 2003 
			 Charging Appraisal Frameworks — — 7 10 19 14 7 — 57 December 2004 
			 Scheme Design and User Acceptance — — 8 16 10 18 — — 52 December 2002 
			 Measuring the impacts of road user charging and the workplace parking levy on social-spatial inclusion and exclusion — — — 4 9 116 — — 129 March 2003 
		
	
	The research project summaries requested by the hon. Member are:
	Scheme Design and User Acceptance
	The research seeks to help local authorities select the most appropriate form of road user charging scheme for an urban area, taking into account local economic, social and environmental circumstances. To do this an "options decision matrix" has been developed; its practical validity will be assessed by applying it to a number of case study areas.
	Measuring the impacts of road user charging and the workplace parking levy on social-spatial inclusion and exclusion
	This work looks at the effects of road user charging and the work place parking levy on social inclusion and social exclusion, both generally and in terms of gender, ethnicity, and age. It includes contracts with the universities of Oxford and Lancaster worth a total of £116,000. The aim of the research is to provide material and advice which will assist local authorities in assessing the possible social impact of particular congestion charging scheme options.
	Trade-off between practical and optimal cordon congestion charging
	The research examines the balance between congestion reduction and public acceptance of cordon charging schemes. It partly involves formulating a mathematical representation of an urban charging cordon. However, it seeks to ensure that the model has practical relevance by incorporating the results of a survey of six UK local authorities. This survey looks at the design of charging cordons and their objectives and effects, and public response to them. The overall aim is to assist local authorities in the design of such schemes.
	Economic Geography of Congestion Charging
	The project is examining the possible links between congestion charging and the long-term use and development of land. It is assessing the effects on a case study area of various different assumptions about charging, the use of the charging revenues, and other forms of traffic restraint. Here too, the aim is to help local authorities assess the implications of possible congestion charging schemes.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the mandate of the Technical Adaptation Committee on the minimum safety and health requirements for improved medical treatment on board vessels is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: This committee has never functioned.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the mandate of the committee on the reciprocal recognition of national boatmasters' certificates for the carriage of goods and passengers by inland waterways is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: The committee's mandate is to review technical aspects relating to the mutual recognition of boatmasters' licences. The UK is not represented at the committee's meetings. There is no cost to public funds.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the mandate of the committee on application of the legislation on the minimum level of training for seafarers and the recognition of certificates issued by training institutes or administrations of third countries (STCW) is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: The regulatory committee set up under Article 23 of Directive 2001/25/EC on the minimum level of training for seafarers has met twice in the last 12 months. The committee is composed of representatives of member states and is chaired by the European Commission. The remit of the committee is to oversee the implementation of the directive and its main focus is the recognition of non-EU certificates of competency. The UK is represented by officials from my Department and the annual cost of its work to public funds is about £1,600. The committee will next consider a revision of the maritime training directive to improve the procedure for the recognition of certificates of competency issued by non-EU countries.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Postal Ballots

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many allegations of fraud are being investigated in connection with the use of postal ballots in the local elections; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: It is for the police locally to investigate any allegations of fraud. Records of such investigations are not centrally recorded. Should either the Electoral Commission or local electoral administrators identify any issues of particular concern in relation to fraud or the procedures for processing postal votes, they will alert us.

Rail Access Charges

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if contractual provisions will be made to offer rail freight operators the same protection against increased access charges as train operating companies.

David Jamieson: I refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave him on 2 May 2002, Official Report, column 901W and 7 May 2002, Official Report, column 28W.

New Homes (South-East)

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what estimate he has made of the proportion of new homes in the south-east that will be required as a result of (a) migration from other regions and (b) immigration from overseas.

Sally Keeble: No estimate has been made of the proportion of new homes required in the south-east as a result either of migration from other regions or immigration from overseas. In determining the overall level of housing provision in the south-east, as set out in Regional Planning Guidance for the south-east (RPG9), the Secretary of State took account of a number of factors and these are referred to in RPG9.

e-Government

Tom Levitt: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to promote e-Government at parish council level; and what funds are available to parish councils to achieve this.

Alan Whitehead: The Government's target to see all local government services electronically enabled by 2005 only applies to principal local authorities and fire authorities, and does not apply to parish and town councils.
	As they are not subject to this target, parish councils are not being funded directly under the £350 million Local Government On-Line (LGOL) Programme. The national strategy for local e-government, which is currently being subject to wide consultation, makes clear that successful local e-government and customer focused services depend upon the interaction of local authorities with a range of other public, voluntary, community and private sector bodies. Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) are potential leaders in joining up e-enabled access channels and service delivery at the local level. Parish councils, as their tier of government closest to local communities, have a significant role to play in these LSPs.
	We are making available up to £75 million over two years to support the development of local and regional partnerships between councils, and other local service providers such as the police and the health service. Parish councils will also be able to tap into the knowledge and skills already being developed under LGOL.

Martin Sixsmith

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to the answer of 1 March 2002, Official Report, column 1569W, on civil servants, on what basis the termination payment to Martin Sixsmith was made.

Alan Whitehead: I refer the hon. Member to the statement made to the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 9 May 2002.

Martin Sixsmith

Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what formula was used to calculate the value of compensation paid to Mr. Martin Sixsmith.

Alan Whitehead: I refer the hon. Member to the statement made to the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 9 May 2002.

Departmental Staff (Scotland)

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many and what percentage of (a) civil service, (b) executive agencies and (c) non-departmental public body jobs under the remit of his Department are located in Scotland; and how many of each have been relocated to Scotland since May 1997.

Alan Whitehead: I would refer the hon. Member to the Cabinet Office reports "Civil Service Statistics", published on the Cabinet Office website and also available in the Libraries of both Houses. These reports give a regional breakdown of the total number of staff employed by my Department including agencies.
	I am unable to say how many are employed within non-departmental public bodies, as this information is not held centrally by my Department. Since 1997 the centre of the Department has not relocated any jobs to Scotland. Information on relocation is also not held centrally for the agencies and NDPBs.

Sick Leave

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many days of sick leave were taken in his Department last year; how many related to employees suffering (a) stress and (b) other mental health problems; and what the cost was to his Department.

Alan Whitehead: holding answer 14 May 2002
	The most recent figures published in the Cabinet Office "Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service" are for the calendar year 2000. For the 'Environment and Transport Group', the average working days absence per staff year was 9.0 days compared with a civil service average of 9.9 days. The total number of days lost was 142,853.
	The Department does not have details of days lost and associated cost for stress or other mental health problems.

Consultation

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many consultation documents and consultative drafts of legislation have been issued by his Department since January 2001; and what proportion of these have observed criterion 5 of the Code of Practice on Written Consultation.

Alan Whitehead: According to central records the Department has issued 88 consultation documents since January 2001. In 10 cases the period for consultation agreed was less than the 12-week standard minimum period recommended in criterion 5 of the Code of Practice on Written Consultation, but in all cases the procedures in the code were complied with in full.

Local Election Dates

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions under what mechanism the date of the local elections was moved to 8 May in 1996; whether this mechanism will be implemented in May 2003; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: The local elections in 1996 took place as usual on the first Thursday in May. Section 37 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, as amended by section 18(2) of the Representation of the People Act 1985, provides authority for the Secretary of State to change the normal day of polling from the first Thursday in May to another day by order made no later than 1 February in the year preceding the year in which the order is to take effect. It is thus now too late to alter the date for local elections in May 2003 by this means. Postponement in any other circumstances would require primary legislation as happened for the local elections in 1986 and 2001.

Audit Commission

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many staff were employed in the Audit Commission at 1 April; and what proportion of those staff have clinical contact with NHS patients.

Alan Whitehead: The number of staff employed by the Audit Commission was 2,114 at 1 April. No Audit Commission staff carry out a clinical role with respect to NHS patients as part of their employment with the Commission.

Edinburgh Airport

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  what recent discussions he has had with representatives of BAA on safety standards at Edinburgh airport;
	(2)  when Government safety inspectors last visited Edinburgh airport; and when the next scheduled inspections will take place.
	(3)  what were the main findings of Government safety inspectors when they last visited Edinburgh airport with specific reference to (a) staff turnover, (b) staff working hours and (c) staff morale.

David Jamieson: My Transport Security Inspectors have regular discussions with BAA management at Edinburgh airport on security matters, and carry out regular inspections. The last inspection was earlier this month. Inspections are unannounced for maximum effect and it would be inappropriate to indicate when the next inspections will take place. Staff management issues are for BAA to address. The CAA does not have any safety concerns regarding staff at the airport.

Key Workers

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what definition he employs of the term key worker; and what plans he has to change the definition.

Sally Keeble: holding answer 16 May 2002
	There is no national definition of the term key worker, although it is generally understood to be someone whose services are essential to the local community. In assessing local housing needs, it is for local authorities to decide upon those key worker groups in need of affordable housing who contribute to essential service provision.
	The Starter Home Initiative is assisting key workers, particularly teachers, police, nurses and other health workers, to buy their first home. Bids for Starter Home Initiative funding were also invited to assist other key workers, and as a result social workers, fire fighters and transport workers are also being assisted.

London Stations (Access)

Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what measures are being undertaken to improve accessibility to London's overground rail stations.

David Jamieson: The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) has issued a Code of Practice, "Train and Station Services for Disabled Passengers", setting out the standard of facilities required to meet the travel needs of disabled passengers. The SRA has asked all station operators to identify where facilities currently fall short of these standards. In the light of this, a programme of work will be drawn up.

Environmental Impact Assessments

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  if the circular 18/84 proposed development procedures require a Government Department to provide an environmental impact assessment for a development that is within Schedules 1 or 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on the compatibility of Circular 18/84, Development by Government Departments, with European directives on environmental impact assessments.

Sally Keeble: The position on environmental impact assessment in relation to Crown development is detailed in paragraph 157 of DETR Circular 02/99. Environmental impact assessment is required for all proposed development falling within Annexe I to the EIA directive, as amended, and for proposed development falling within Annexe II if it is likely to have a significant effect on the environment. A Crown body proposing such development will submit an environmental statement to the local planning authority when consulting it under the arrangements set out in Part IV of the Memorandum to Circular 18/84.

Housing Construction Guidelines

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what guidelines there are governing the minimum size and amount of living space to be provided in new housing; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: The Building Regulations in England and Wales make no requirements with regard to the minimum size or amount of living space that should be provided in new homes. The Housing Corporation require registered social landlords (RSLs) to comply with the Scheme Development Standards as a condition of Social Housing Grant funding for new build schemes. Although the Scheme Development Standards do not specifically set a minimum size and amount of living space to be provided in new housing, they do require RSLs to adopt good space planning and room layouts.

Telecommunications Masts

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions which elements of the Stewart report (a) have been and (b) will be implemented by his Department.

Stephen Byers: On 22 August last year, taking into account the recommendations in the Stewart report published in May 2000 and following our public consultation, we introduced changes that significantly improved the planning procedures and guidance for telecommunications mast development. Our changes:
	strengthened public consultation requirements on mast proposals of 15 metres and below so that they are the same as for planning applications
	increased the time for an authority to deal with prior approval applications to 56 days
	underlined that school governors must be consulted on all proposals for new masts on or near a school or college; and
	increased fees to enable authorities to carry out full public consultation.
	We have no plans to amend further the planning arrangements for telecommunications development.

Telecommunications Masts

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many appeals he has received from mobile phone companies to erect transmission masts in the last 12 months; and how many appeals were upheld.

Stephen Byers: Information is not held centrally about appeal decisions for mobile phone masts.

QE II Centre

Jane Griffiths: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 14 May 2002, Official Report, column 516W on the QE II Centre, if the relevant Government policies include the climate change policy; and whether the financial assessment will be on the basis of the whole life costs including energy efficiency of the air conditioning chiller.

Alan Whitehead: Yes.

Housing Estates

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  if he will list the deprived local authority housing estates and the local authority and local authority wards that those estates fall into, referred to in DETR, Housing Research Summary No. 65 (1997);
	(2)  which of the deprived local authority housing estates referred to in DETR Housing Research Summary No. 65 (1997) have subsequently been part of a stock transfer to housing associations.

Stephen Byers: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The publication referred to in these questions is the DoE report on "Mapping Local Authority Estates Using the Index of Local Conditions" No.65 (1997).
	The study was designed to show the probable distribution and concentration of deprived local authority estates at the regional level. The main report explains that the Department cannot publish the list of estates on which the study was based, or provide specific details on the particular local authority wards which they are in.
	There are two reasons for this. Firstly, the analysis was based on one specific definition of deprived estates. It used the 5 per cent. of Census Enumeration Districts with the highest scores on the Index of Local Conditions which had more than 50 per cent. of households renting from the local council. The report stressed that the study did not produce a definitive list of deprived estates. Alternative definitions could be used, based on other data, which could produce different lists. Secondly, the Department wanted to avoid creating or contributing to the stigmatisation of estates.
	Both these reasons for non-disclosure are still valid and therefore DTLR cannot provide a list of the estates.

Public Information

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what right of access members of the public have to information on (a) building control, (b) environmental health, (c) drainage and (d) highways from local authorities; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Byers: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 and the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) Regulations 2000, gives the public significant general rights of access to local authority meetings and related papers.
	There are also certain service specific rights, including for
	(a) building control
	the right under the Town and County Planning Act 1990 to inspect an authority's planning register;
	(b) environmental health
	the right for the public, under the Environmental Regulations 1992, to have access to environmental information held by a local authority;
	(c) drainage
	a right pursuant the Water Industry Act 1991, for the public to inspect drainage maps held in local authority offices; and for
	(d) highways
	the right for the public, under the Highways Act 1980, to inspect a list of highways in the area which are maintainable at the public expense, and under the New Road and Street Works Act 1991, a register of street works executed or proposed to be executed in the streets in the area.

Crown Immunity

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what recent discussions he has had on the removal of Crown immunity from prosecution for health and safety offences; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have had discussions with external bodies and officials on this matter from time to time.

Union Health and Safety Representatives

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what recent discussions he has had on improving the effectiveness of union health and safety representatives; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: Union safety representatives play a vital role in securing improved health and safety in the workplace. I hold regular meetings with trade unions, where the role of safety representatives is discussed.

Airport Policing Costs (Bristol)

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to change the designation of Bristol airport so that the extra costs of policing the airport since 11 September 2001 are met by the airport authorities rather than Avon and Somerset police; and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: I have no plans to designate Bristol airport at present. My Department is currently reviewing its policy on designation, specifically as regards what criteria to use to decide whether an airport should be designated where the airport operator and police authority are unable to agree.

Independent Rail Accident Investigation Body

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when the consultation exercise on the establishment of an independent rail accident investigation body will begin; and what the deadline is for (a) completion of the exercise and (b) the report to his Department.

Stephen Byers: We expect to consult this summer on proposals for the establishment of an independent rail accident investigation branch. The consultation exercise will run for 12 weeks from the date of publication, as set out in the Cabinet Office Code of Practice on written consultation. Responses to the consultation will be carefully analysed following this period, and in advance of primary legislation.

Local Government White Paper

Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on implementing the Local Government White Paper.

Nick Raynsford: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State published an implementation plan on the Department's website on 10 April setting out the key milestones and planned dates for completion. It is updated monthly.

Neighbourhood and Street Wardens

Vernon Coaker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what effect neighbourhood and street wardens are having on curtailing antisocial behaviour in towns and cities.

Sally Keeble: Since 2001, 84 Neighbourhood Warden schemes have become active. This year we are bringing forward 123 Street Warden schemes.
	Most schemes have curtailing antisocial behaviour as one of their key objectives. Wardens are having an increasing effect on curtailing antisocial behaviour through their deterrent value, their relationship with local communities and enabling the relevant agencies to respond to incidents.

Green Belt

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans his Department has to change planning law with regard to the green belt.

Sally Keeble: None. Planning Policy Guidance note 2: "Green Belts" continues to require that local authority development plans include a strict presumption against inappropriate development in the green belt.

Grant Clawback (Newcastle)

David Clelland: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what progress has been made to meet the request by Newcastle city council to identify situations where clawback of grant in relation to past regeneration schemes will be waived; and if he will make a statement.

Sally Keeble: On 1 May 2001, my right hon. Friend the then Minister of State for Local Government and the Regions (Hilary Armstrong), announced the signing of a local public service agreement with Newcastle city council, Official Report, column 594.
	One of the Government commitments made in that local PSA, in return for a commitment from the council to increase the level of regeneration, was to have discussions about alterations to the arrangements for clawback of regeneration grants on change of use or disposal of an asset.
	The council have argued that for some older regeneration schemes, where any clawback which might apply would be small, that the costs of delay—administratively and in terms of starting valuable projects—would be disproportionate to the sums that might be recovered. The Government have concluded that for regeneration schemes that are now closed, in respect of transactions where receipts are relatively low (and thus the maximum potential level of clawback is also low), and where Government can have confidence that any receipt which might have been due to the Government is recycled into further regeneration consistent with the Government's regeneration objectives, it can offer value for money to offer a waiver of clawback.
	In view of the council's undertaking to achieve the enhanced regeneration objectives set out in the local PSA, the Government undertook to consider what scope there is to assist and encourage the council to achieve its targets by waiving the council's contingent liability to repay grant under certain discontinued grant regimes.
	The council was seeking a waiver of my Department's right to clawback in both situations where a liability to repay grant can arise, namely (1) where there is a change of use of an asset constructed or acquired wholly or partly out of funds paid under a relevant grant scheme; and (2) where there is a disposal of such an asset. It was the Council's intention to use any proceeds that might have arisen from the waiver to further its regeneration objectives in the East End and West End Going for Growth areas of Newcastle.
	After careful consideration, I have concluded that my Department can waive its entitlement to claw back grant under the terms of the former Urban Programme and City Challenge grant schemes:
	in order to assist and encourage the council to deliver its regeneration targets under the local PSA;
	in relation to assets constructed or acquired using grant given for regeneration activities in the East End and West End Going for Growth areas of Newcastle, as defined in the respective regeneration plans published by the council in July 2001;
	so far as liability to repay grant can arise from a disposal of an asset, including land, only where the potential for grant clawback derived from a disposal is £100,000 or less;
	so far as liability to repay grant can arise from a change of use of an asset, including land, only where a new use of an asset continues to further the objectives of the grant scheme or wider Government regeneration objectives 2, 3, 4 and 5 published in the DTLR Business Plan 2001; and
	for disposals agreed or changes of use effected on or after the date that the Council accepts the terms of the waiver and before 31 March 2004 (the date on which the local PSA expires), unless the waiver is withdrawn before that date on the grounds that it is not being applied properly.
	Accordingly, my Department has written to the council today.
	For transactions in which potential clawback could exceed £100,000, a full analysis of whether any clawback is due will continue to be required from the council, together with a calculation of the amount due, and waivers will be considered on a case by case basis.
	The Government are prepared to consider requests for similar treatment from other local authorities who might propose local PSA targets for regeneration, where it is appropriate in the circumstances of the authority.

PRIME MINISTER

Galileo

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the military applications of Galileo; and what discussions he has had on this subject.

Tony Blair: Galileo is a civil programme under civil control. European Transport Ministers reaffirmed this when giving the go-ahead for the development phase of the programme on 26 March.

Referendums

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Prime Minister if 
	(1)  he will make a statement on his policy towards the role of Whitehall officials in referendum campaigns;
	(2)  if he will make it his policy not to increase the budget to departmental information campaigns in the run-up to a referendum on UK participation in the single currency; and if he will make a statement.

Tony Blair: Civil servants' involvement and expenditure on departmental information activities in referendum campaigns would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Unpaid Advisers

Alan Beith: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 25 March 2002, Official Report, column 620W, what the (a) names and (b) responsibilities are of unpaid advisers who have assisted the work of his Department since June 1997 but are not included in (i) the Cabinet Office's annual report "Task Forces, Ad Hoc Advisory Groups and Reviews 2000–01" and (ii) his previous answer.

Tony Blair: I have made no other appointments than those listed in my answer of 25 March to the right hon. Gentleman.

Czech Republic

Jim Cousins: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 25 April 2002, Official Report, column 429W, on the Czech Republic, whether he discussed the proposed offset deal with the Czech Prime Minister.

Tony Blair: Yes. The Czech Prime Minister did raise the issue of offset arrangements during my visit of 8 April.

Czech Republic

Jim Cousins: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 25 April 2002, Official Report, column 429W, on the Czech Republic, how many jobs in the United Kingdom would be protected and created if the bid by Gripen International to sell fighter/trainer aircraft to the Czech Air Force goes ahead.

Tony Blair: If the contract worth around £250 million to the UK, is successfully completed it will directly benefit the company which will help to secure British jobs and strengthen the British economy. The UK defence industry is highly successful, employing around 180,000 directly and 160,000 in associated industries.

European Treaties (France)

Roger Gale: To ask the Prime Minister if he will have discussions with France on their adherence to the European treaties that require the free movement of goods between member countries of the European Union; and if he will make a statement.

Tony Blair: Government Ministers, including myself, have made representations to France on the problems affecting the free movement of goods through the channel tunnel. We remain in close contact with the French Government about the action that is required to enable normal rail freight to resume.
	The Commission has also invoked the Free Movement of Goods Regulation in this case and we are following this closely.

Devolved Assemblies (Voting Systems)

David Laws: To ask the Prime Minister when he intends to carry out a review of the voting systems used to elect the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly; and if he will make a statement.

Tony Blair: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on Tuesday 3 July 2001, Official Report, column 93W.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Data Protection

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will place in the Library copies of each version of the internal guidance which have been drawn up by her Department since 1 January 1999 to assist staff in her Department to answer subject access requests under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Patricia Hewitt: I refer the hon. Member to the answer my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department gave to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall Green (Mr. McCabe) on 25 April 2002, Official Report, column 446W. Additionally, I am placing in the Libraries of the House an extract referring to subject access requests that appears in my Department's internal guidance on the Data Protection Act 1998.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Advisory Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products is established under Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2603/69 for the purpose of consultation between member states and the Commission on any requests for taking protective measures on exports, to examine the effects of any such measures that may be taken, and on their amendment or termination. Its only activity in recent years has been to exercise surveillance of market trends as regards the export of copper scrap to certain third countries—for which it last met, briefly, on 8 May 2001—with UK representation by a DTI official. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds on the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on the Specific Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration on Promotion of Innovation and Participation of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Committee on the Scientific Programme for Research, Technologic Development and Demonstration (RTD) on the promotion of Innovation and Participation of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises is one of seven comitology committees established in relation to the management of the EU 5th Framework programme.
	It has met on five occasions over the last 12 months: on 16 May 2001, 4 July 2001, 26 September 2001, 21 November 2001 and 6 March 2002.
	Officials from the Office of Science and Technology, Department of Trade and Industry provide the UK representation.
	The UK usually sends one delegate to meetings of this committee, which are held in Luxembourg. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost. paItems under consideration concern the ongoing implementation of the Framework 5 Innovation/SME programme, in particular the third call for innovation projects and the appraisal of Innovation Relay Centres' performance across the EU.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	Following Council Decision 1999/468/EC, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783 Final).
	As part of the review process, the Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be made accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on the Directive on Names and Labelling of Textile Products is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: This committee was created under Article 5 of directive 96/73/EC on certain methods for the quantitative analysis of binary textile fibre mixtures (OJ L32, 3.2.97, p.1). The committee is convened periodically to consider adaptations to technical progress of testing methods for fibre mixtures and additions and to the table of textile fibres and the list of agreed allowances used to calculate the mass of fibre contained in a textile product in annexes 1 and 2 respectively of directive 97/74/EC on textile names (OJ L32, 3.2.97, p.38). The committee last met in 1996. UK representation consists of one official from my Department. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost. The Commission reimburses the travelling costs of national representatives. There are no items currently being considered by the committee. However, a technical expert working group on textile labelling met recently to consider the application by two textile fibre manufacturers for the addition of two new fibres to the aforementioned annexe 1.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of House on 26 February (COM(2001)783 Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Measuring Instruments and Methods of Metrological Control is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the committee is to consider changes needed to a number of directives on measuring instruments adopted subsequent to Council directive 71/316/EEC to bring them into line with technical developments. The committee has not met for many years. Consequently it has not been necessary to designate a UK representative, and there has been no cost to public funds.
	Together with member states the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 28 February 2002 (COM(2001)783 Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of the directive on the removal of technical barriers to trade in electric materials used in an explosive atmosphere is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: It is my understanding that the hon. Member is referring to the Committee on the adaptation to technical progress set up under Article 6 of directive 76/117/EEC on the approximation of laws of the member states concerning electrical equipment for use in potentially explosive atmospheres. This committee has not met for several years because directive 76/117/EEC is being superseded by directive 94/9/EC and will be repealed on 1 July 2003 when directive 94/9/EC comes fully into force.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on Defence against Obstacles to Trade which Affect the Market of the Community or a Non-member Country is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Committee on Defence against Obstacle to Trade is established under Council regulation (EC) No. 3286/94, for the purposes of consultations between member states and the Commission on complaints by Community enterprises, industries or individual member states of alleged breach of international trade rules by a third country resulting in adverse trade effects. As appropriate, the committee also considers the results of investigations which the Commission may undertake in relation to such complaints and any follow-up action it may propose to take with the country concerned. As provided for in the regulation, details of both the opening of any such investigations and of any commercial policy measures that may eventually be taken are published in the Community's Official Journal.
	The committee has met on four occasions since 1 May 2001: representation is by a DTI official. It is not possible to calculate the annual cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council decision 1999/268/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the Houses on 26 February (COM (2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Cosmetics is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Committee on the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directives on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in the Cosmetic Sector (CATP) was set up to deliver opinions on draft proposals relating to the safety of cosmetics put forward by the Commission. It also considers other issues submitted for information or an exchange of views. The CATP consists of representatives of member states with a representative of the Commission as chairman. The UK is represented at meetings by officials from the Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate of DTI. The CATP has met once in the past 12 months. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost. The main focus of the Committee's work of late has been consideration of the 26th Adaptation of the Cosmetics Directive in relation to ingredients which can/cannot be used in cosmetics.
	Together with member States, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to 'simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission'.
	As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of House on 26 February (COM(2001)783Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Standing Committee for the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Concerning Pressure Equipment is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Standing Committee is contained in Article 7.2 of the Pressure Equipment Directive 97/23/EC. The provisions of this Article have not yet been put into effect so the committee has never met.
	An informal 'Working Group on Pressure' has been convened, however, under the auspices of Article 17 of the Directive. The Commission chairs these meetings with a view, among other things, to developing guidelines in order to ensure that there is uniform interpretation of these measures throughout the European Union and also to ensure that any technical barriers to trade within the Single Market are removed. In the last 12 months this Committee has met on four occasions. Representation from the United Kingdom is led by officials from the Department of Trade and Industry with a technical expert from the Health and Safety Executive to provide technical advice. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Items under consideration vary between meetings but usually include issues of standardisation in the field of pressure equipment and specific issues of interpretation of the Directive. As this is only an advisory committee without decision making power its work is handled at official level. My officials do, however, publish a record of each meeting which is available to any interested party inside and outside government upon application to officials in my Department and is also posted on our web-site.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on Common Rules for Imports of Products from Third Countries is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of this Committee is to cover, when necessary, in particular the terms and conditions of imports, import trends and the various aspects of the economic and commercial situation of specific products, and to discuss any required safeguards measures. It has met three times in the last four months to discuss the United States steel safeguards measures and the European Community response. This was the first time it had been convened in the last five years. A Department of Trade and Industry official represents the UK. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost. The Committee is currently continuing its consideration of the United States steel safeguards and the European Community response. Any European Community legislation resulting from this Committee is already subject to the Parliamentary scrutiny procedures.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February COM(2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee for Implementation of the Community Market Access Strategy is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Advisory Committee for the Implementation of the Community Market Access Strategy is established under Council Decision (98/552/EC) for consultation among members states and the Commission to assist the Commission in its activities to implement the Council's market access strategy. It has met once in the last 12 months, with UK representation by a DTI official. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Details of the Market Access Strategy, including how to access the EU Market Access Data Base, a key component of the Strategy and which the Commission are as a present priority endeavouring to make a more effective and more user friendly tool for traders, are available on-line at http://europa.eu.int/comm./trade/ mkaccess/indexen.htm.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/268/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on Conformity Assessment and Surveillance of the Telecommunications Market is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Telecommunication Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance Committee (TCAM) is contained in Articles 13, 14 and 15 of Directive 95/5/EC, The Radio Equipment and Telecommunications Terminal Equipment (RTTE) Directive. In particular, the Committee shall be consulted on matters covered by specified Articles of the Directive and shall express its opinion on draft measures submitted by the Commission. The Committee has met three times during the last 12 months. Items currently under consideration include the relation of the RTTE Directive with the Medical Devices Directive; coverage by the Directive of equipment containing an RTTE component; and market surveillance.
	The UK representation on the Committee comprises officials from the Department of Trade and Industry and OFTEL, and a technical expert. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on Common Rules for Imports of Products from Certain Third Countries is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: This Committee meets, when required, as part of the "Commercial Questions Group". Its mandate is to manage the policy on the EC's licensing control regimes for the import of non-textile products from non-market economies. The Group as a whole has met six times over the last year. A Department of Trade and Industry official represents the UK. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost. This Committee is currently considering the on-going EC policy on imports. Any EC legislation resulting from these Committees is already subject to the Parliamentary scrutiny procedures.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Standing Committee for the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Relating to Lifts is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Standing Committee is contained in Article 6.3 of the Lifts Directive 95/16/EC. In essence it is convened to consider matters of interpretation which are brought to its attention by member states. It has, however, only met in its capacity as an advisory committee. Officials of the European Commission chair these meetings with a view to providing advice based on consensus in order to ensure that there is uniform interpretation of these measures throughout the European Union and also to ensure that any technical barriers to trade within the Single Market are removed. In the last 12 months this Committee has met twice. Representation from the United Kingdom is led by officials from the Department of Trade and Industry with a technical expert from the Health and Safety Committee to provide technical advice. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost. paItems under consideration vary between meetings but usually include issues of standardisation and interpretation.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this
	Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Quota Administration Committee is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of this Committee is to manage the EC import licensing control system under the EC's Chinese non-textile imports regime. It has met twice over the last year. A Department of Trade and Industry official represents the UK. It is not possible to calculate the cost of its work to public funds without incurring disproportionate cost. This Committee is currently considering the management of the licensing regime for imports of certain Chinese non-textile products for 2003. Any EC legislation resulting from these committees is already subject to the parliamentary scrutiny procedures.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Standing Committee on the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Relating to Machinery is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Standing Committee is contained in Article 6.2 of the Machinery Directive 98/37/EC. It has, however, only met as an advisory committee. In essence it is convened to consider matters of interpretation which are brought to its attention by member states. The Commission chairs these meetings and delivers an opinion in order to ensure that there is uniform interpretation of the Directive throughout the European Union and also to ensure that any technical barriers to trade within the single market are removed. In the last 12 months this Committee has met twice. Representation from the United Kingdom is led by officials from the Department of Trade and Industry with a technical expert from the Health and Safety Executive to provide technical advice. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Items under consideration vary between meetings but usually include issues of standardisation in the field of machinery and specific issues of interpretation of the Directive. My officials publish a record of each meeting which is available to any interested party inside and outside Government on request.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on Standardisation in the Field of Information Technology (SOGITS) is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate establishing SOGITS was set out in Council Decision 87/95/EEC of 22 December 1986. The Committee has not met for over two years and there are no issues under consideration at present. Discussions are currently taking place to reactivate this committee.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on Implementation of the Multi-annual Programme for Enterprise and Entrepreneurship in particular, for small and medium-sized enterprises is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Enterprise Programme Management Committee is to assist the European Commission in carrying out the measures and actions necessary for the implementation of the Multi-annual Programme for Enterprise and Entrepreneurship, in particular for SMEs. The work of the Committee includes agreeing the annual work programme and corresponding budget allocations, the criteria and content of invitations to tender exceeding Euro 100,000, and the performance indicators for evaluating the actions needed to achieve the programme's objectives.
	The Committee meets four times each year for the duration of the programme. The UK is represented by an official from the European section of the Small Business Service. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	At its last meeting, the Committee looked at:
	progress on the implementation of the work programme for 2001;
	budgetary issues related to individual programme projects;
	amendments to the work programme for 2002, in particular three new priority projects on environmental management systems, improved institutions for technology transfer to enterprises, and restructuring bankruptcy and a fresh start;
	the opening of the programme to candidate countries.
	The UK supports fully the purpose of the Multi-annual Programme for Enterprise and Entrepreneurship which aims to enhance growth and competitiveness, promote entrepreneurship, improve the regulatory and administrative framework, improve the financial environment for SMEs and provide easier access to Community support services. The programme is based on targeted financial measures and well-focused projects underpinned by the principle of exchange of good practice. It has the potential to help deliver some of the key aims of the European Small Firms Charter, the central plank for the development of enterprise policy in the European Union.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of the committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the directive on the removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Protective Equipment and Systems for Use in Explosive Atmospheres is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: I understand that the hon. Member is referring to the Standing Committee set up under Article 6 of directive 94/9/EC on the approximation of the laws of the member states concerning equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres. The mandate of the Standing Committee is contained in Article 6 of that directive. It is an advisory committee, which aims to provide advice based on consensus to facilitate a common interpretation of the directive throughout the European Union. Officials of the European Commission chair these meetings. During the last 12 months this Committee has met twice. Representation from the United Kingdom is led by officials from the Department for Trade and Industry, with a technical expert from the Health and Safety Executive.
	It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost. Items under consideration vary from meeting to meeting, but include issues of interpretation and technical standardisation. Current issues include questions of scope and detailed application of the technical requirements of the directive.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Harmonisation of Credit and Insurance Provisions for Transactions with Medium and Long-term Cover is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Committee for the Harmonisation of the Main Provisions concerning Export Credit Insurance for Transactions with Medium and Long-term Cover is a comitology committee covering the work of the European Council Working Group on Export Credits.
	Comitology procedures only exist for a very limited number of issues, and the Committee has had no reason to meet in the past 12 months.
	If a meeting of the Committee was convened, the UK would be represented by our delegation to the Council Working Group comprising officials (usually numbering three) from the Export Credits Guarantee Department. The Council Working Group meets on a monthly basis with no meeting in August. Meetings last one or two days. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The purpose of the Working Group is to develop policies within the EU which achieve a more level playing field on which all of our exporters can compete for business. The framework for these discussions is provided by the OECD arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits, which constitutes the major body of international rules governing export credits for project exports.
	The UK delegation reports back after each Working Group meeting with a note which is circulated widely within ECGD and around other interested Government Departments. Progress against ECGD's international objectives is regularly reported to the Export Guarantees Advisory Council and summarised in ECGD's annual report.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Standing Committee on Technical Rules and Standards including Rules Relating to Information Society Services is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the Committee is contained in Articles 5 and 6 of directive 98/34/EC, as amended (the technical standards and regulation directive). In particular, the Committee shall express its opinion on the communications and proposals submitted to it by the Commission and must be consulted, for example, when the Commission is reviewing the operation of the system set up by the directive. The Committee has met three times during the last 12 months. On two occasions it met for part of the meeting in a specific composition to examine questions relating to information society services and twice it met with representatives of the European and national standards bodies in accordance with provisions of Article 6 of the technical standards and regulations directive. The United Kingdom representation on the Committee comprises officials from my Department and representatives of the British Standards Institution attend when the Committee meets with national standards bodies. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The Committee regularly considers notifications by member states of draft technical regulations and proposals from the Commission to request the European standards institutions to draw up a European standard within a given time limit. Current issues also include:
	(a) the introduction of a new technical regulations information system for communications between the Commission and member states;
	(b) the possible participation of candidate countries in the technical regulations notification procedure;
	(c) the confidentiality of detailed opinions made by the Commission or member states;
	(d) initial discussions on a possible extension of the notification requirements to services other than information society services;
	(e) formal objections from The Netherlands and the United Kingdom in respect of standards relating to gas appliances;
	(f) progress of work relating to standards mandated in support of directives;
	(g) follow-up of the Council resolution of 28 October 1999 on the role of standardisation in Europe.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Aerosol Dispensers is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Committee on the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to trade in Aerosol Dispensers was set up to deliver opinions on draft proposals relating to the safety of Aerosol Dispensers put forward by the Commission. The UK is represented at meetings by officials from the Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate of DTI. The Committee has not met in the last 12 months. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the Committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The main focus of the Committee's work of late has been consideration of appropriate test methodologies to assess the flammability of products expelled from aerosol dispensers.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to 'simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission'.
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee for the technical adaptation of the community procedure to improve the transparency of gas and electricity prices charged to industrial end-users is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Advisory Committee for the technical Adaptation of the community procedure to improve the transparency of gas and electricity prices charged to industrial end-users was set up to assist the Commission should any changes be made to the Annexes of the Directive (90/377/EEC), which deal with the methodology. This Committee has not met since 1996. Should the Committee meet in the near future it is envisaged that DTI officials would represent the UK.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the harmonisation of national measures on the indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by household appliances is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: I have been asked to reply.
	Council Directive 92/75/EEC on the Indication by Labelling and Standard Product Information of the Consumption of Energy and Other Resources by Household Appliances is intended to enable the harmonization of national measures on the publication, particularly by means of labelling and of product information, of information on the consumption of energy and of other essential resources, and additional information concerning certain types of household appliances, thereby allowing consumers to choose more energy-efficient appliances. A Committee composed of representatives of member states and chaired by the Commission has been established to assist the Commission in the delivery of the requirements of this Directive.
	The Committee has met four times in the last 12 months. The UK is formally represented on the Committee by officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The cost of attending this Committee over the last 12 months was approximately £3,000.
	The main issues currently being considered by this Committee are the up-rating of energy labels for domestic cold appliances, a draft proposal for a Framework Directive on Minimum Energy Efficiency Requirements for End-use Equipment, the energy labelling of televisions and the review of Directive 92/75/EEC.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001) 783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on the labelling of household appliances is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: I have been asked to reply.
	There is no committee with responsibility for all the labelling issues which might arise in connection with household appliances. There is however a committee which is concerned with "the harmonisation of national measures on the indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by household appliances

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Agricultural and Forestry Tractors is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

David Jamieson: I have been asked to reply.
	The mandate of the Committee is set out in Articles 11 to 13 of Framework Directive 74/150/EEC, which, together with separate directives on components and systems, deals with the type approval of Agricultural and Forestry Tractors. The Committee's function is to deliver prompt adjustment, reflecting technical progress, of the technical requirements in the annexes to the Framework Directive and, unless otherwise provided for, to the provisions of the separate component and system directives. It has not met in the last 12 months. The UK representation is normally by officials of the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions. The annual cost to public funds would be restricted to staff time, their travel and subsistence costs.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Explosives for Civilian Uses is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply.
	The remit of this committee is set out in Article 13 of Council Directive 93/15/EEC (harmonization of the provisions relating to the placing on the market and supervision of explosives for civil uses). This says that:
	"The Committee shall examine any matter concerning the application of this Directive raised by its chairman either on his own initiative or at the request of a representative of a member state."
	The Committee has met once in the last 12 months, in December 2001. The UK representatives at the meeting were the Health and Safety Executive's Head of Mines, Quarries and Explosives Safety Policy Section and the Head of the GB Explosives Notified Body.
	The secretariat is provided by the European Commission, which also pays a proportion of travel expenses. The costs to UK public funds are therefore the balance of the travel costs and the accommodation costs for the staff attending (less than £830 in total) and their salary costs.
	The Committee is currently considering a number of issues where there are differing interpretations of the application of the Directive. These include the on-site mixing of explosives, the definition of pyrotechnics and the acceptability of manufacturer's test data.
	HSE would seek to ensure that there was consultation on any proposals to amend the requirements of the Directive. Any changes which required new regulations, or amendments to regulations, would be subject to formal consultation and then approval by the Health and Safety Commission and by Ministers. The draft regulations would ultimately be laid before Parliament.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directive on the Removal of Technical Barriers to Trade in Motor Vehicles and their Trailers is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

David Jamieson: I have been asked to reply.
	The mandate of the committee is set out in Article 13 of Framework Directive 70/156/EEC, which, together with separate directives on components and systems, deals with the type approval of motor vehicles and their trailers. The committee's function is to deliver prompt adjustment, reflecting technical progress, of the technical requirements in the annexes to the Framework Directive and, unless otherwise provided for, to the provisions of the separate component and system directives.
	Since 1 May 2001, the committee has met four times. Officials from the Department's Vehicle Standards and Engineering Division represent the UK. The annual cost to public funds varies depending on the matters under consideration but is of the order of £5,000.
	The next meeting of the committee is due to consider:
	the EC's position concerning the adaptation to technical progress of several United Nations Economic Commission for Europe regulations on vehicle standards;
	a Commission directive adapting to technical progress Council Directive 70/220/EEC relating to measures to be taken against air pollution by emissions from motor vehicles; and
	a Commission directive adapting to technical progress Council Directive 97/27/EC relating to the masses and dimensions of certain categories of motor vehicles and their trailers.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com (2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Standing Committee on the Approximation of the Laws Relating to Construction Products is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Whitehead: I have been asked to reply.
	The mandate of the Standing Committee on Construction (SCC) is to remove technical barriers to trade in construction products between member states in the European Economic Area (EEA). It has met three times in the last 12 months. The UK delegation to it consists of two Government officials from my Department and a representative from the UK construction industry. The costs for the attendance by the two Government officials to the two-day meetings in Brussels are approximately £3,000. The committee has an extensive work programme for the year 2002 to progress the internal market for construction products through CE marking. Among the items under consideration are:
	Implementation of the CPD through agreeing technical specifications, notified bodies to carry out attestation procedures and market surveillance.
	Enlargement including PECA-CPD implementation.
	Competitiveness related issues.
	Eurocodes.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February (Commission Document 5685/02).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee for the implementation of the multi-annual Community programme to stimulate the establishment of the information society in Europe is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The programme was originally known as STIMULIS (STIMULating the Information Society) but adopted the name PROMISE (PROMoting the Information Society in Europe) subsequently. The mandate of the Information Society Committee (also known as the PROMISE Management Committee) is to ensure that the European Commission implements the programme according to the requirements agreed with the Council and set out in Council Decision 98/253/EC of 30 March 1998. Essentially, this involves the approval of the annual work programme and the content of any Calls for Proposals, providing financial support of euro 200,000 (£125,000) or more to proposals, the terms of reference for external assessment and by budgetary adjustments between different parts of the programme. The committee has met twice over the past 12 months. The UK is normally represented by one DTI official.
	It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The items under consideration include the results of the benchmarking activities related to the eEurope initiative, identifying and disseminating best practice on Information Society activities, the allocation of the budget, an analysis of the result of the programme to date and approval of the 2002 work programme.
	The programme was the subject of two Explanatory Memorandums; No. 12934/96 submitted by the DTI on 3 February 1997 covered the original proposal and No. 11421/97 covered the revised proposal. The programme underwent a mid-term review which was the subject of a further unsigned explanatory memorandum No. 10557–01 of 13 September 2001. The programme was then refocused towards eEurope activities, principally the benchmarking of national activities.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission".
	As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783Final).
	As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Accounting Directives Contact Committee is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The Accounting Directives Contact Committee is mandated by European accounting directives to:
	(a) facilitate, without prejudice to the provisions of articles 169 and 170 of the treaty, harmonised application of the directives through regular meetings dealing in particular with practical problems arising in connection with their application;
	(b) advise the Commission, if necessary, on additions or amendments to the directives.
	The committee is currently considering modernisation of the European accounting directives and their alignment with international accounting standards, and related issues.
	The committee's role is merely advisory. Any proposals arising from its advice would be taken forward by the European Commission itself.
	The committee has met twice over the last 12 months. The UK is normally represented by two officials from the Department's Company Law and Investigations Directorate and a departmental lawyer. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the mandate of the Committee on checks for conformity with the rules on product safety in the case of products imported from third countries is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The mandate of the committee under Regulation (EEC) 339/93 is to assist the Commission by giving its opinion on measures adopted by the Commission in accordance with Article 9 of the regulation. The purpose of the regulation is to reduce the risk of unsafe products from third countries entering into free circulation in the Community.
	The committee has not met in the last 12 months. The UK is represented on the committee by the Department of Trade and Industry and by Customs and Excise. It is not possible to calculate the cost to public funds of the work of the committee without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC to "simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission". As an obligation to this decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of the House on 26 February 2002 (COM(2001)783 Final). As part of this review, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agenda and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Ministerial Accommodation

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what publicly owned accommodation is made available to her in her official role; how many nights she has been in residence at each of these properties in the last 12 months; and what the total cost was of maintaining each of these properties in the last 12 months.

Patricia Hewitt: holding answer 9 May 2002
	None. I refer the hon. Member to the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) on 28 February 2002, Official Report, column 1443W, and my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Collins) on 21 January 2002, Official Report, column 599W and 28 January 2002, Official Report, column 91W.

Budget

Hugo Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations she has received from business groups regarding the effect of the 2002 Budget on the (a) competitiveness and (b) productivity of UK businesses.

Patricia Hewitt: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 15 May 2002, Official Report, column 661W.
	Businesses and their representatives have welcomed the cuts in corporation tax, the tax exemption for substantial shareholdings and the new regime for giving tax relief for intangible assets, all of which contribute to the competitiveness of UK companies. Increased innovation and workforce training are both important components in improving productivity. Businesses have therefore also welcomed the large company tax credits for research and development, the additional details on the skills pilot schemes and the targeted support for smaller organisations to reach the IIP standard.

Enterprise Bill

Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations she has received regarding the new powers to be given to the Office of Fair Trading in the Enterprise Bill; and if she will list them.

Melanie Johnson: The Department received 72 written responses to the White Paper "Productivity and Enterprise—A World Class Competition Regime" (Cm 5233) published in July 2001. The White Paper included discussion of the OFT's duties and powers.
	The Department also received 49 written responses to the consultation paper "Proposed New Structure for the Office of Fair Trading" published in September 2001.
	The Department subsequently received one representation on OFT's new powers from the Federation of Electronics Industry on 18 February 2002.

Temporary Staff

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the cost to her Department was of employing staff in (a) London and (b) the south-east from employment agencies in each year since 1997.

Patricia Hewitt: holding answer 16 May 2002
	The information at the disaggregated level requested is not held and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The Department maintains records on the total expenditure on employment agency staff only from 1998–99 onwards. The table shows details of this expenditure, which represents between 3 and 4 per cent. of staff costs for each respective year.
	
		
			 Outturn £million 
		
		
			 1998–99 7.2 
			 1999–2000 7.7 
			 2000–01 7.2 
			 2001–02(2) 8.2 
		
	
	(2) Provisional

Unpaid Advisers

Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 10 April 2002, Official Report, column 399W, what the (a) names and (b) responsibilities are of unpaid advisers who have assisted the work of her Department since June 1997 but are not included in the Cabinet Office's annual report 'Task Forces, Ad Hoc Advisory Groups and Reviews 2000–01'.

Patricia Hewitt: I refer the right hon. Member to my answer of 10 April 2002, Official Report, columns 398–99W. Ministers in this Department have not appointed any unpaid advisers other than those accounted for in the list of task forces, reviews and other ad hoc advisory groups.

Freight Movement (Channel Tunnel)

Roger Gale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations her Department has made to the European Commission in connection with the free movement of freight through the channel tunnel; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Johnson: The Commission has invoked the Free Movement of Goods Regulation in this case. They have kept the Department fully informed about their actions. The Government remains in close contact with them and with the French Government about the action that is required to resolve the problems affecting rail freight traffic through the channel tunnel.

Online Services

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment she has made of the level of electronic access to the main basic public services; and if she will make a statement.

Christopher Leslie: I have been asked to reply.
	Over half of all central Government services are now e-enabled. The latest Office for National Statistics data show that 3.84 million citizens use the internet to use or access Government services.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Sick Leave

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many days of sick leave were taken in her Department last year; how many related to employees suffering (a) stress and (b) other mental health problems; and what the cost was to her Department.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 14 May 2002
	The Cabinet Office publishes an annual report "Analysis of Sickness absence in the Civil Service". In the 2000 report for the Department for Culture Media and Sport the working days absence per staff year figures were:
	
		
			 Absence  
		
		
			 Certified sickness 3.9 
			 Self-certification 2.2 
			 Total 6.0 
			 Staff years 404 
		
	
	Records are not maintained by DCMS which enable sick leave to be separately identified as work related. There is no known record of anyone having had a work- related injury.
	DCMS is committed to meet targets arising from the Government's revitalising health and safety initiative, for reducing the number of working days lost due to sickness absence generally and due to work-related injuries and illness.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many employees of her Department retired through work-related ill-health in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was to the Department.

Richard Caborn: Records are not maintained by DCMS which enable ill-health retirements to be separately identified as work related. For DCMS there was one member of staff retired with a medical retirement certificate issued by the civil service pension scheme medical adviser for the last year. Benefits provided on medical retirement are as set out in the rules of the principal civil service pension scheme and laid before Parliament, and provide for an immediate payment of an enhanced pension and lump sum. Ill-health retirement expenditure is met centrally from the Civil Superannuation Vote. For the year ending March 2002, provisional expenditure met from the Vote was £310 million in respect of all civil services cases for which an ill-health pension has been awarded. These cases number approximately 67,000 and include those who have formerly been ill-health retired but who have now reached and exceeded the normal retirement age.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many claims for work- related illness were settled by her Department in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was in compensation.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Records are not maintained by DCMS which enable sick leave to be separately identified as work related and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	DCMS has a legal obligation to provide a safe working environment for employees. The Department is committed to meeting targets for reducing the number of working days lost generally due to sickness absence and due to work related injuries and illness arising from the Government's revitalising health and safety initiative.

Work-related Illness

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many days of sick leave were taken by employees in her Department in the last year for which records are available; what proportion of those were due to work-related illness or injury; and what the cost was to the Department.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The Cabinet Office publishes an annual report "Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service". The most recently published figures are for the calendar year 2000. For DCMS the working days absence per staff year figures were:
	
		
			 Absence  
		
		
			 Certified sickness 3.9 
			 Self-certification 2.2 
			 Total 6.0 
			 Staff years 404 
		
	
	Records are not maintained by DCMS which enable sick leave to be separately identified as work-related. There is no known record of anyone having had a work-related injury.
	DCMS is committed to meet targets arising from the Government's revitalising health and safety initiative, for reducing the number of working days lost due to sickness absence generally and due to work-related injuries and illness.

Sports Action Zones

Andrew Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what plans she has to establish another round of sports action zones; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Caborn: Sport England has now begun the process of designating a further 18 Sport Action Zones. To ensure that the most needy areas of the country are supported in developing bids, regional development teams have been established in each region to oversee the submission of bids and to ensure that decision making is kept as close to local communities as possible. Each team will be taking a strategic view of its region's needs and will encourage and facilitate bids where realistic and discouraging those less so.
	Explicit criteria against which bids will be assessed have been established that, among other things, will ensure that there will be at least one action zone in each region and that there will be zones of similar types to enable comparisons to be made. The factors which will be taken into account in designating the new zones will be the degree of deprivation and sporting need, the partnership arrangements and the presence of other complimentary initiatives in the area. Bidding for Action Zone designation is in two stages with the first stage due to be completed by 3 July and the second stage by 20 November leading to final decisions by Sport England by February 2003.

Pensions

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much was spent by her Department on paying pensions to retired employees of her Department in 2001–02; if she will estimate the corresponding amounts to be spent in (a) five years' time, (b) 10 years' time, (c) 20 years' time and (d) 30 years' time; if she will estimate in each case the proportion of such liabilities which will arise from (i) unfunded pension schemes and (ii) pre-funded pension schemes; and in the case of pre-funded schemes, if she will estimate the value of the corresponding pre-funded funds in each of these years.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Civil servants are eligible for membership of an occupational pension scheme. The Cabinet Office is responsible for this occupational pension scheme—the principal civil service pension scheme (PCSPS), and pays the pensions of retired members of the scheme centrally.

English Heritage

Claire Ward: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she intends to publish the report of the quinquennial review of English Heritage.

Kim Howells: My right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Blackstone yesterday placed in the Libraries of both Houses copies of the report of the quinquennial review of English Heritage. The report is also available on-line at the DCMS website www.culture.gov.uk. The report affirms the value of English Heritage and its statutory functions. It also highlights a number of areas which need further work, in particular reviews of English Heritage's:
	(1) property management function including consideration of alternative options for the management of its properties;
	(2) national, regional and local roles leading to a new structure which will equip the organisation to deliver its statutory and leadership responsibilities in a cost-effective and consistent manner;
	(3) research programme leading to the adoption of a targeted strategy linked to priorities for the sector as a whole.
	English Heritage already has much work under way as part of its modernisation programme. My right hon. and noble Friend has therefore asked them to integrate the review's findings and recommendations into the process. DCMS and other interested Departments will work closely with English Heritage to ensure that the recommendations in the report are implemented quickly.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Convention on the Future of Europe

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the allocated budget is for entertainment for the Praesidium of the Convention on the Future of Europe; what representations he has made thereon; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: Of the Convention's euro 10.5 million (approximately £6.49 million) budget (which includes administrative costs and travel expenses), euro 150,000 (approximately £92,700) has been set aside for 'representational expenses'. An inter-institutional agreement provides for regular reports on expenditure of the Convention to be provided to the institutions, including the Council.

Convention on the Future of Europe

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on his policy within the discussions on the Convention on the Future of Europe as concerns development of (a) the Common Defence Policy, with particular reference to existing provisions for possible development of communal defence, (b) Justice and Home Affairs matters, (c) the Common Foreign Policy, (d) extension of qualified majority voting, (e) repatriation of powers, (f) the establishment of a set determination of powers and (g) extension of Social Chapter material;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on his policy on discussions on (a) environmental issues, (b)(i) incorporation and (ii) extension of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, (c) treaty simplification, (d) introducing sunset clauses into EU legislation, (e) common fisheries policy, (f) common agricultural policy, (g) the role of national Parliaments, (h) implementation and development of subsidiarity, (i) fiscal harmonisation, (j) employment law, (k) education, (l) culture, (m) budgetary control, (n) election of Commissioners and (o) ratification through referendums in the Convention on the Future of Europe.

Peter Hain: We are in the early days of the Future of Europe Convention, which is currently in a 'listening phase'. Our overall objective is an EU which is better understood, more democratic and which delivers the benefits out citizens expect. Details of Convention discussions can be found at www.european-convention.eu.int.

Convention on the Future of Europe

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on proposals he is seeking to include for discussion at the Convention on the Future of Europe for increased parliamentary participation in the legislative programme at European level.

Peter Hain: The Laeken Declaration noted the contribution of national Parliaments to the legitimacy of the European project. We wish to promote open debate about how this might be achieved.

Convention on the Future of Europe

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his Department's planned role in publicising the (a) activities, (b) conclusions and (c) variety of opinions of the Convention on the Future of Europe.

Peter Hain: Discussions and all official documents of the Future of Europe Convention are in the public domain. Progress can be followed, and submitted documents can be consulted, via the Convention's website (http://european-convention.eu.int). The FCO website (www.fco.gov.uk) also provides information on the Future of Europe.

Convention on the Future of Europe

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has (a) made and (b) received on the establishment of an agenda for discussions at the Convention on the Future of Europe.

Peter Hain: The Laeken Declaration, agreed by Heads of State and Government of all the member states, convened the Future of Europe Convention and established its agenda—"to consider the key issues arising for the Union's future development and try to identify the various possible responses".

European Union Institute for Security Studies

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the role of the European Union Institute for Security Studies.

Ben Bradshaw: The European Union's Institute of Security Studies' main responsibility is to conduct academic research and analysis on issues related to the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Specifically, it produces and commissions research papers and arranges seminars. The Institute maintains a network of exchanges with other research institutes and think-tanks both inside and outside the European Union.

Eurozone

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 
	(1)  which states applying to join the EU have indicated (a) willingness and (b) desire for an opt-out, with respect to accession to the Eurozone;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on the obligations of applicant EU states with regard to accession to the Eurozone upon attaining membership.

Peter Hain: A candidate is not required to adopt the euro before acceding to the EU. Rather, upon accession, new EU member states will be granted a derogation from the adoption of the euro. Candidates have agreed to aim towards the adoption of the euro as an eventual objective and no candidate has requested an opt-out.

Zimbabwe Embargo

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when EC 310/2002, on the prohibition of export to Zimbabwe of items which could be used in internal repression, was first (a) tabled and (b) discussed in permanent Council committees.

Denis MacShane: Discussions of EC Regulation 310/2002 began following the decision of 28 January 2002 by the General Affairs Council (GAC) of the European Union to implement targeted sanctions against Zimbabwe if the Government of Zimbabwe failed to act on specific EU concerns about Zimbabwe, such as political violence, election observers, and free internal media access.
	The regulation imposing the embargo on the sale or supply of items which might be used in internal repression was submitted to the parliamentary scrutiny committees in draft on 12 February 2002.
	The General Affairs Council agreed the regulation at its meeting of 18 February.

Zimbabwe Embargo

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the nature of restraints permitted for export to Zimbabwe following EU sanctions agreement.

Denis MacShane: EC Regulation 310/2002 of 18 February 2002 places inter alia an embargo on the sale or supply to Zimbabwe of equipment which might be used for internal repression. Annexe II of the regulation establishes a list of such goods to be subject to the embargo. These goods include "leg-irons, gang-chains, shackles and electric shock belts, specially designed for restraining human beings; except handcuffs for which the maximum overall dimension including chain does not exceed 240 mm when locked".
	This embargo is in addition to the full scope arms embargo imposed by the Council Common Position (2002/145/CFSP).

Zimbabwe Embargo

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs for what reason Annex II of EC 310/2002 of 18 February 2002 permits exports of bombs and grenades not other than those specially designed for military use; and if he will make a statement.

Denis MacShane: EC Regulation 310/2002 of 18 February 2002 places inter alia an embargo on sale or supply to Zimbabwe of equipment which might be used for internal repression. Annex II of the Regulation establishes a list of such goods to be subject to the embargo. These goods include "bombs and grenades, other than those specially designed for military use, and especially designed components".
	Export of bombs and grenades specially designed for military use are subject to the full scope arms embargo imposed against Zimbabwe by the Council Common Position (2002/145/CFSP).

Zimbabwe Embargo

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on paragraph I of Annexe II of EC 310/2002 in the context of Article 7.

Denis MacShane: Article 7 of Regulation 310/2002 imposes an embargo on the sale or supply to Zimbabwe of equipment which might be used for internal repression as set out in Annexe II of that Regulation.
	This embargo is in addition to the full scope arms embargo imposed by the Council Common Position (2002/145/CFSP). In the UK this is implemented by prohibiting the export of goods and technology on the Military List which forms Part III of Export of Goods (Control) Order 1994, as amended.

Meetings With Embassy Staff

Michael Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the criteria are for meeting a British ambassador or commercial secretary by business people seeking endorsements in relation to commercial contracts.

Jack Straw: It is part of every ambassador and commercial secretary's job to promote UK commercial interests. In determining whether to meet business figures seeking endorsements in relation to commercial contracts, diplomatic staff are expected to consider the benefit to the UK, including the effect on British commercial, economic and foreign policy interests.

Majority Voting

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times a decision has been taken by majority voting in the European Council this year.

Peter Hain: The European Council does not at present take decisions qualified majority voting (QMV), but agrees its conclusions by consensus.

Overseas Hotels

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the criteria are for booking overseas hotel accommodation for (a) Ministers, (b) officials and (c) special advisers when on publicly funded visits.

Denis MacShane: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Generally Ministers, officials and special advisers will be accommodated in a hotel identified by our diplomatic mission, often in consultation with the host country, as being a non-luxury, business hotel located relatively close to the mission and suitable for representational officers. In some countries, a second class of hotel is used for officials with no representational duties. During conferences the host nation may well limit delegations to particular hotels for security, protocol and logistical purposes.

Juan Carlos Gonzalez Leiva

Andy King: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he will make to the Cuban authorities concerning the case of the imprisoned human rights campaigner, Juan Carlos Gonzales Leiva.

Denis MacShane: We are aware of parliamentary and public interest in the case of Juan Carlos Leiva. We regularly raise human rights issues with the Cuban Government and we have raised this case with the Cuban MFA.

Lebanon

Andrew Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last met representatives from the Lebanon; when a minister next plans to visit that country; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will meet the Lebanese Ambassador, His Excellency Jihad Mortada, at a lunch they are attending on 22 May hosted by the Council of Arab Ambassadors. The Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri's planned visit to the UK was postponed because of The Queen Mother's funeral. We hope that the visit will be reinstated soon.
	I visited Lebanon on 24 July 2001 and had a number of meetings, including with the Prime Minister, the President (Emile Lahoud) and the Speaker of Parliament (Nabi Berri). I also met the Lebanese Minister responsible for Public Works and Transport (Muhammad Najib Miqati) in London on 5 April.
	There are no current plans for Ministers to visit Lebanon.

Kashmir

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in Pakistan and India concerning recent attacks on Indian army personnel in Kashmir.

Ben Bradshaw: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs telephoned his Indian counterpart, Jaswant Singh, shortly after he heard news of the 14 May attack in Jammu. The Secretary of State also issued a statement on 14 May condemning the attach and expressing his condolences to the relatives of those killed and to those injured. In the statement, he called on all countries in the region to condemn the attack.

Europe Day

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the budget was for Europe Day events signposted on the dedicated website; and if he will make a statement on the maintenance of political neutrality thereon.

Peter Hain: The total cost of the Europe Day event held at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 9 May is anticipated to be less than £23,000. All other events listed on the Europe Day website were self-funded.
	The Foreign and Commonwealth Office's Public Service Agreement commits the Government to promote increased support for and better understanding of the merits of European Union membership. The Europe Day event was a part of the Government's EU information campaign to raise awareness of our membership of the EU, the countries of the EU and the countries that will be joining.

Trans-EU Political Parties

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the state of developments for the funding of trans-EU political parties; and what his position is thereon.

Peter Hain: The Government strongly support the Commission's proposal for a statute to regulate the funding of European political parties, to make it more transparent. The conclusions of the Nice European Council in December ensured that in the future no money going to European political parties would be transferred, either directly or indirectly, to national political parties.

Information Moneys

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his policy towards the European Commission spending of information moneys in applicant states, with respect to impartiality.

Peter Hain: In the candidate countries for accession to the European Union, information activities are carried out by the European Commission's delegations. The overall strategy has been endorsed by the council and implementation on the ground takes place in full consultation with the national Government concerned as well as with the embassies of the member states in the relevant capital.

Departmental Website

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his policy towards monitoring public contributions to his Department's website.

Denis MacShane: The guidelines for moderating public contributions to the FCO website are published on the site itself under "Acceptable Use Policy".

EU Information Campaigns

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place in the Library a list of organisations external to the European Communities which receive Communities funding for information campaigns (budget lines under B3).

Peter Hain: Chapter B3 of the European Communities budget covers a wide range of activities including European Resource Centres, training for librarians, the SOCRATES programme, the Leonardo programme and promoting minority languages. Providing a full list of the several hundred organisations who receive funding for information initiatives could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.

EU Information Campaigns

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Hunter) of 19 March 2002, Official Report, column 196W, if he will list expenditure on his EU Information Campaign broken down by publication and project.

Peter Hain: The total cost to date of the EU information campaign for the financial year 2001–02 is £246,819.
	Major EU information initiatives included:
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 FCO website, Europe Day website and other new media initiatives 52,203 
			 Opinion polls 25,477 
			 Grants 40,000 
			 Regional visits, display materials, consultancy research and other initiative costs (transport, accommodation etc.) 82,833 
		
	
	The cost of each publication follows:
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 EU newsletter 5,377 
			 Britain: a Champion of EU Enlargement booklet 8,758 
			 Europe Day promotional flyers, posters and cards 5,057 
			 "Heard about European Law?" booklet 2,244 
			 "What has the EU ever done for us?" leaflet 450 
			 "The EU: What's in it for you?" leaflet 880 
			 The Stockholm European Council leaflet 1,458 
			 "The European Treaties in under 300 words" leaflet 2,465 
			 Information posters and flyers regarding the introduction of euro notes and coins 16,425 
			 "The EU: Fighting Crime and Promoting Justice" leaflet 1,068 
			 The Treaty of Nice leaflet 2,124

Liaison Officers

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the answer of 26 March, to the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz), Official Report, column 815W, if he will list the pay grades of those liaison officers identified; and if he will identify companies involved.

Denis MacShane: In accordance with good employer practice and under exemptions 8a and 12 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, it is not appropriate to release such information into the public domain.
	Companies are not involved; liaison officers are employed on a freelance basis.

EU Directives

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many EU (a) directives and (b) regulations have been incorporated into UK law in each year since 1997.

Peter Hain: We estimate that the number of EU directives incorporated into EU law is as follows:
	1997: 85;
	1998: 109;
	1999: 100;
	2000: 91; and
	2001: 83 (until end November).
	It would require a disproportionate cost to compile the number of regulations incorporated over the same period.

Gibraltar

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the red lines which Britain will not cross in its negotiations with Spain on the future of Gibraltar under the Brussels Process; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: Our objectives under the Brussels Process remain to preserve Gibraltar's way of life, establish greater self-government, deliver lasting practical benefits and a stronger economy, and secure a lasting agreement on sovereignty so that Gibraltarians can enjoy security for their way of life. Negotiations continue.

Chechnya

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the report of the Parliamentary ombudsman into the complaint received from the hon. Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) on behalf of Mrs. Louisa Petschi (Case No. C974/01) concerning his Department's handling of a news report received on Sunday 6 December 1998 about actions affecting British nationals held hostage in Chechnya.

Ben Bradshaw: I welcome the fact that the ombudsman found no evidence of maladministration by officials in the way in which the decision to discount the report was taken, and therefore no basis for questioning the merits of that decision. However, in view of the possible confusion over the timing of the handling of the report by FCO officials, reflected in statements by Ministers at the time, the Permanent Under-Secretary, on the Ombudsman's recommendation, wrote to Mrs. Petschi and her Member of Parliament on 21 March to offer his apologies for the lack of clarity as to the sequence of events.
	To the extent that this touches on the statement of the then Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Mr. Lloyd), to the House on 9 December 1998, Official Report, column 322, I wish to confirm that the Minister's answer reflected the judgment of officials at the time that the news report did not represent an advance warning of a rescue attempt. This remains our view.

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the states that he described in his letter of 19 March to José Bustani as OPCW's main member states were.

Ben Bradshaw: In this context, the 41 member states drawn from all regional groups represented on the Executive Council—the executive organ of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what complaints were made by the Chief Financial Officer of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in respect of the financial management of the organisation.

Ben Bradshaw: There is no post with the title of Chief Financial Officer at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). However, the former Director-General, as Chief Executive Officer of the OPCW Technical Secretariat did, on occasions, criticise the staff working under him in the financial areas of the Secretariat.

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the differences between OPCS's main member states and José Bustani referred to by the Foreign Secretary in his letter to Mr. Bustani dated 19 March were.

Ben Bradshaw: The differences between Mr. Bustani and states represented on the Executive Council of the OPCW, centred on the financial and administrative management of the organisation.

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent complaints were made about the Chief Financial Officer to member states of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in respect of the financial management of the organisation.

Ben Bradshaw: There is no post of Chief Financial Officer at the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). However, a number of complaints about the former Director-General—the Chief Executive Officer of the OPCW—were published by the United States. These mainly related to the failure to monitor expenditure in 2000, leading to a deficit; failure to explain financial problems arising in 2001; and presentation of unrealistically high budgetary bids.

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on what occasions Dame Rosemary Spencer made representations to José Bustani on behalf of Her Majesty's Government that were critical of his stewardship, or the direction, of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons during her period as ambassador.

Ben Bradshaw: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer below (UIN 58306).

Chemical Weapons

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on what occasions the UK ambassador to the Hague made representations to José Bustani that were critical of (a) his stewardship and (b) the direction of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons prior to the latter's dismissal.

Ben Bradshaw: The then British ambassador (Dame Rosemary Spencer) joined other major financial contributors in a call on Mr. Bustani, on 23 February 2001, to express our concern at his decision to apply major cuts to the verification programme. On 6 April 2001, the UK representative to the OPCW Executive Council took part in a similar call, urging a more co-operative approach, pressing for assurances that financial controls had been put in place to correct evident shortcomings, and requesting revision of Mr. Bustani's 2002 budget proposals. The UK representative on the Executive Council had made similar points in a private meeting with Mr. Bustani on 5 April 2001. The current British ambassador (Colin Budd) met with Mr. Bustani on 15 March 2002 to inform him that the UK believed that it would be in the best interests of the OPCW and the chemical weapons convention if he were to resign.

Middle East

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 
	(1)  when meetings have taken place since 1 April between members of his Department and (a) Israeli officials and (b) members of the Israeli diplomatic staff in the United Kingdom; what topics were discussed on each occasion; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  when meetings have taken place since 1 April between members of the British diplomatic staff in Israel and Israeli officials; what topics were discussed on each occasion; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: Officials in London and our embassy in Tel Aviv have regular, almost daily, contact with their Israeli counterparts. These cover a number of issues, but the Israeli-Palestinian crisis predominates. Contact with the Israelis is a key part of the international effort to secure progress in the peace process.

Delegations (Scottish Representation)

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs for what reason no devolved Administration Minister attended the 2425 European Union Council of Ministers meeting (General Affairs) on 13 May; which particular suggestions and matters of concern from the Scottish Executive were raised in their absence by the United Kingdom Government delegation; and what information and evidence was provided by his Department to enable post-council security by the European Committee of the Scottish Parliament.

Peter Hain: Decisions on Ministerial attendance at Council meetings are taken on a case-by-case basis by the lead UK Minister. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I attended this meeting, representing all parts of the UK.
	It is the responsibility of the European Committee of the Scottish Parliament to scrutinise the Scottish Executive's involvement in preparations for and follow- up to EU Council meetings. These arrangements are a matter for the Committee and the Scottish Executive. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office provides information to Scottish Executive officials as part of that process.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Child Sex Offenders

Debra Shipley: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will publish the protocols for cross- border information-sharing on child sex offenders and child abusers.

Jane Kennedy: The protocols currently being developed for information sharing on a variety of subjects including child sex offenders and child abusers will be confidential to the participating agencies. They have no plans to publish.

Motor Fuel

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many successful prosecutions there have been in each year since 1997 for smuggling motor fuel products into Northern Ireland; and what penalties were imposed.

Paul Boateng: I have been asked to reply.
	For the number of prosecutions each year since 1997 I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) on 20 November 2001, Official Report, column 266W.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Criminal Records Bureau

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  which umbrella bodies registered with the Criminal Records Bureau do not charge a fee for processing applications for disclosures from volunteers; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what criteria the Criminal Records Bureau uses to define umbrella bodies as (a) open and (b) closed;
	(3)  if he will list by (a) region and (b) county the number of open voluntary sector umbrella bodies registered with the Criminal Records Bureau;
	(4)  what arrangements his Department has made to obtain information on the fees charged to process applications for disclosures by umbrella bodies registered with the Criminal Records Bureau.

Keith Bradley: An open umbrella registered body is an organisation in the public, private or voluntary sector that is prepared to countersign applications for higher level disclosures at the request of others outside their own circle or sector. A closed umbrella registered body is one that provides the countersignatory service to those within its circle or sector only.
	Information is not kept as to the charging of fees by umbrella bodies, and there are no plans to collect such information. In guidance for umbrella bodies, the Criminal Records Bureau urges that any such charges are kept to a minimum. Those wishing to use the services of an umbrella body would be well advised to ask whether charges are made and, if so, compare charges.
	As at 10 May 2002 the number of open voluntary sector bodies was as follows:
	
		Open voluntary sector bodies
		
			  Number  
		
		
			 (a) By area  
			 East Midlands 7 
			 Eastern 8 
			 Greater London 6 
			 Merseyside 1 
			 Mid Wales 0 
			 North East 5 
			 North Wales 0 
			 North West 6 
			 South East 12 
			 South Wales 0 
			 South West 4 
			 West Midlands 10 
			 Yorkshire 2 
			   
			 (b) By county  
			 Buckinghamshire 2 
			 Cumbria 1 
			 Derbyshire 4 
			 Dorset 2 
			 Durham 1 
			 East Sussex 1 
			 Essex 4 
			 Gloucestershire 1 
			 Greater London 7 
			 Greater Manchester 3 
			 Hampshire 3 
			 Hertfordshire 1 
			 Humberside 1 
			 Kent 4 
			 Lancashire 2 
			 Merseyside 1 
			 Norfolk 1 
			 Nottinghamshire 3 
			 Shropshire 1 
			 Somerset 1 
			 South Yorkshire 1 
			 Staffordshire 1 
			 Suffolk 2 
			 Teesside 2 
			 Tyneside 2 
			 Warwickshire 3 
			 West Midlands 5 
			 West Sussex 1

Sentences

Dominic Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) detention and training orders and (b) referral orders have been imposed in each police force area in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: The information requested is contained in the table.
	Statistics on detention and training orders for 2001 will be published in the autumn.
	
		Offenders given detention and training orders or referral orders by police force area, 2000 and 2001, England and Wales
		
			 Police force Detention and training orders(3),(4) Referral orders(5),(6) 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 67  
			 Bedfordshire 53  
			 Cambridgeshire 44  
			 Cheshire 80  
			 Cleveland 86  
			 Cumbria 65  
			 Derbyshire 86  
			 Devon and Cornwall 22  
			 Dorset 31  
			 Durham 71  
			 Essex 107  
			 Gloucestershire 47  
			 Greater Manchester 445  
			 Hampshire 193  
			 Hertfordshire 52  
			 Humberside 72  
			 Kent 114  
			 Lancashire 139 152 
			 Leicestershire 120  
			 Lincolnshire 27  
			 London, City of   
			 Merseyside 193  
			 Metropolitan police 738 115 
			 Norfolk 27  
			 Northamptonshire 29  
			 Northumbria 158  
			 North Yorkshire 81  
			 Nottinghamshire 164 867 
			 South Yorkshire 159  
			 Staffordshire(7)   
			 Suffolk 42 408 
			 Surrey 27  
			 Sussex 74  
			 Thames Valley 132 415 
			 Warwickshire 47  
			 West Mercia 86  
			 West Midlands 525  
			 West Yorkshire 234  
			 Wiltshire 35 436 
			
			 Dyfed-Powys 10  
			 Gwent 35  
			 North Wales 60  
			 South Wales 221 339 
			
			 Total England and Wales 4,998 2,732 
		
	
	(3) Introduced 1 April 2000
	(4) All areas, 1 April 2000 to 31 December 2000
	(5) Piloted in seven areas from April 2000to be introduced nationally from May 2002. Figures are approximate as orders made in August and September 2001 have been estimated.
	(6) Pilot areas, 1 April 2000 to 31 December 2001
	(7) Staffordshire police force were only able to submit sample data for persons proceeded against and convicted in the magistrates courts for the year 2000. Although sufficient to estimate higher orders of data, these data are not robust enough at a detailed level and have been excluded from the table.

Prison Service

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  how many Prison Service pay queries have been outstanding at the end of each month since July 2001;
	(2)  how many Prison Service personnel have been (a) incorrectly paid and (b) unpaid following the implementation of Payfact.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 13 May 2002
	Payment of Prison Service personnel is handled by the Home Office Pay and Pensions Service. This service operates 28 payrolls for 69,000 employees. Of these over 40,000 are in the Prison Service. Up until now, the Pay Service has not kept figures for the number of Prison Service pay queries outstanding at the end of each month. However, ways of measuring the number of pay queries on a month by month basis are currently being developed and therefore this information will be available in the future.
	Pay Service's priority must be to concentrate on paying personnel correctly, accounting for the disbursement of funds from the payroll and providing financial management information. Pay Service does not retain statistics specifically related to the number of people paid incorrectly or unpaid each month. However, the feasibility of doing so is currently being examined. It does retain statistics for the number of payments made outside payday, both for manually calculated payments and those made through the Payfact system. The figures provide a good indicator of where there are problems. The figures include the numbers of advances of overtime requested by individuals and advances of salary for new entrants; as such, they cannot be used to indicate the number of personnel who have been unpaid or paid incorrectly each month.
	
		
			 Month Number of prison service personnel Combined total of manual payments and advances 
		
		
			 2001   
			 July(8) 45,024 219 
			 August 46,943 588 
			 September 45,074 953 
			 October 45,551 780 
			 November 46,358 1,185 
			 December 44,870 737 
			 2002   
			 January 45,148 648 
			 February 45,609 1,001 
			 March 45,408 636 
		
	
	(8) Date from when Payfact went live.

Court Escapes

Tom Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people escaped from a court in the United Kingdom in each of the last three years.

Keith Bradley: The information requested is not collected centrally.
	Information relating to Scotland and Northern Ireland are matters for my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland (Helen Liddell) and Northern Ireland. (Dr. John Reid).

Drink Driving

Tom Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were convicted of drink driving offences and ordered to retake their driving tests in the last 12 months by courts in England and Wales.

Keith Bradley: The number of people ordered to retake their driving test following conviction for drink driving offences for the year 2000 (latest available) was 665.

Juvenile Detention

Hilton Dawson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what progress has been made with the Youth Justice Board's review of methods of physical control and restraint in juvenile secure accommodation;
	(2)  when the physical control and care methods which are used in secure training centres will be introduced uniformly across the juvenile secure estate.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 14 May 2002
	The Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (YJB) commissions and purchases secure accommodation for juveniles from the prison service, private sector and local authority secure children's homes, and sets and monitors standards.
	During the first six months of 2000, the YJB reviewed the control and restraint methods used in the local authority secure children's homes where it places young people. It concluded that it would be inappropriate to prescribe one method across all homes because of variations in size, ratio of welfare to criminal justice placements, and age groups. However, through its contracting arrangements the YJB requires homes providing criminal justice placements to use the control and restraint methods approved and specified by the Department of Health for use in that particular home.
	The board does not plan to extend the physical control and care methods used in secure training centres (STCs) to the rest of the juvenile secure estate for essentially similar reasons. Custodial facilities vary significantly in size, age groups, staff/trainee ratios and individual operational circumstances. But all facilities operate to the governing principle that their control and restraint methods should minimise the risk of injury to the young person, staff, and other residents.

Juvenile Detention

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many detention centres for children aged 1215 he plans to build; in what circumstance children will be referred to the new detention centres; who will run the new detention centres; what activities will take place within them; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: The Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (YJB) is responsible for commissioning and purchasing secure accommodation for juveniles from the prison service, private sector and local authority secure children's homes, and for setting and monitoring standards.
	The YJB began a building programme in March 2001 to provide 400 new independent sector secure training centre (STC) places by 2005. These places will result from the expansion of two of the existing STCs, Rainsbrook and Medway, and the creation of five new STCs in areas of shortfall across England and Wales. The new STCs will be operated by private providers under private finance initiative contracts managed by the YJB in the same way as the existing centres. In addition, all STCs are governed by the secure training centre rules 1998.
	The majority of young people detained in STCs are those sentenced to a detention and training order. However, STCs may also accommodate remandees and those who are subject to detention under s90 or s91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 for murder and other specified serious offences.
	The aim is to provide a safe and secure environment where young people have structured, individually tailored training plans. These include 25 hours a week of education; one hour a day to tackle offending behaviour; regular practical tuition in social and life skills; and the opportunity through award schemes and constructive leisure time to develop new interests both in custody and upon transfer to the community. Regular contact with family and friends is encouraged and weekly family visits are funded by the YJB.

Prison Deaths

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what support is provided by his Department to the families of prisoners who have died in Her Majesty's prisons.

Beverley Hughes: Prison service practice seeks to provide support to the family of the deceased in a number of ways. These include the provision at an early stage of the factual details of the circumstances of the death; an offer of a visit to the prison; and a letter of condolence from the governor of the prison which will include the notification of a named contact point at the prison.
	Prisons also forward to families a leaflet that contains details of INQUEST (an independent support group) who are available to offer advice and support; the prison may offer, where appropriate, to make a contribution to the payment of funeral services; and any personal property is handed over.
	Following completion of an investigation into the death, the investigating officer offers to meet with the family and disclose the investigation report to them, with the coroner's consent, in advance of the inquest.

Juvenile Crime

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of those convicted of criminal offences against young people were themselves young people in each of the last three years.

Keith Bradley: holding answer 16 May 2002
	In 1998 and 1999, 10 per cent. of those convicted of criminal offences against young people where the age of the victim is known from the description of the offence were themselves young people. In 2000 the figure was 9 per cent.
	Statistics for 2001 will be published in the autumn.

HMP Brixton

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the terms of reference are of the Review of Deaths in Custody in HMP Brixton; who has been appointed to conduct this review; when he expects a report; and if he will lay the report before the House.

Beverley Hughes: The Area Manager for London has asked the Governor of Wandsworth prison to conduct the review. The final report is due by mid-August 2002. I will place a copy of the report in the Library, subject to constraints of security and confidentiality.
	The terms of reference are to review and report:
	1. The profiles of all the prisoners who have died or self harmed at Brixton since 1998 to establish any common themes or if particular groups of prisoners present a higher than normal risk.
	2. The profiles of all prisoners who have registered any complaints during the last two years to the race relations liaison officer, via the request/complaint procedure or by any other means and the results of any subsequent investigations.
	3. The profiles of prisoners over the same period who have undergone adjudications, segregation, control and restraint (CR) removal or have had injuries registered on F213 forms.
	4. The nature and number of staff grievances during the last 12 months and any common themes.
	5. Any examples of best practice evident at Brixton.
	6. Any other relevant matters that come to light during the course of inquiries.

Prison Statistics

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the (a) capacity of the English prisons system and (b) the number of actual prisoners in the English prisons system in each year since 198081;
	(2)  how many people have been in prison in England in each reporting period since 1979; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: I have placed in the Library tables showing the population in prisons in England and Wales from January 1979 to March 2002, the In-use Certified Normal Accommodation (uncrowded capacity), and the population in prisons in England from January 1989 to March 2002 (the latest data available).

Prisoners

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and what proportion of the prison population in (a) HMP Brixton and (b) England and Wales are non-literate or at severe disadvantage as a result of their literacy skills; what measures are being taken to address this disadvantage; and what targeting is in place to address those groups disproportionately affected by non-literacy.

Beverley Hughes: 40 per cent. of prisoners screened for basic skills at Brixton prison last year were found to be non-literate, and a further 43 per cent. were found to have serious literacy problems. This compares with 24 per cent. of non-literate prisoners nationally and a further 56 per cent. with serious needs. In addition to screening tests we will be introducing a diagnostic assessment for basic skills, and will fund purpose built or modified accommodation in local prisons to support assessment. We will then expect prisons to ensure that identified needs are addressed in an appropriate way, including support for prisoners with learning difficulties. Our basic skills strategy, which includes the widening of education targets at national and establishment level, is ensuring that we can address needs at all levels. New funding for classrooms adjacent to workshops will help to integrate basic skills into other prison activities. And we will ensure that teachers and trainers in prisons have the same access to training as their mainstream colleagues including in the new curriculum standards for English for Speakers of Other Languages.

Asylum Seekers

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to questions refs 54013 and 54019, what happened to those asylum seekers from Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Romania from 1997 to 2001 who were not granted asylum, granted extended leave to remain, or had their application refused.

Angela Eagle: It is not possible to determine how many persons, refused asylum from 1997 to 2001, have subsequently appealed and/or been removed, and/or left the country voluntarily. This information, where available, could be obtained only by examination of individual case files at disproportionate costs.
	The available information is given in the tables. Appeals and removals do not necessarily relate to decisions made in 1997 to 2001.
	
		Asylum appeals and removals in the United Kingdom, for nationals of Slovakia(9),(10) -- Principal applicants
		
			  Appeals sent Total appeals  Appeal outcomes  
			  to the IAA determined Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Removals(11) 
		
		
			 1997 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 120 
			 1998 90 125 5 80 40 240 
			 1999 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2000(12) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2001(12),(13),(14) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 25 
		
	
	n/a = not available
	(9) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(10) Removals do not necessarily relate to appeals dismissed in the same period.
	(11) Includes persons departing 'voluntarily' after enforcement action had been initiated against them, and may include some persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration.
	(12) Provisional figures, subject to change.
	(13) April to September.
	(14) Removals figures for April to September are estimated.
	
		Asylum appeals and removals in the United Kingdom, for nationals of the Czech Republic(15),(16) -- Principal applicants
		
			  Appeals sent Total appeals  Appeal outcomes  
			  to the IAA determined Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Removals(17) 
		
		
			 1997 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 110 
			 1998 105 130 5 100 25 170 
			 1999 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2000(18) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2001(18),(19),(20) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 425 
		
	
	n/a = not available
	(15) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(16) Removals do not necessarily relate to appeals dismissed in the same period.
	(17) Includes persons departing 'voluntarily' after enforcement action had been initiated against them, and may include some persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration.
	(18) Provisional figures, subject to change.
	(19) April to September.
	(20) Removals figures for April to September are estimated.
	
		Asylum appeals and removals in the United Kingdom, for nationals of Romania(21),(22) -- Principal applicants
		
			  Appeals sent Total appeals  Appeal outcomes  
			  to the IAA determined Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Removals(23) 
		
		
			 1997 340 540 5 490 45 305 
			 1998 470 665 5 620 45 335 
			 1999 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2000(24) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2001(24),(25),(26) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 235 
		
	
	n/a = not available
	(21) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(22) Removals do not necessarily relate to appeals dismissed in the same period.
	(23) Includes persons departing 'voluntarily' after enforcement action had been initiated against them, and may include some persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration.
	(24) Provisional figures, subject to change.
	(25) April to September.
	(26) Removals figures for April to September are estimated.
	Information on asylum appeals and removals is published quarterly. The next publication will cover the period up to March 2002, and will be available from 30 May 2002 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http:// www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Contraception

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent efforts his Department has made to make access to contraception easier, cheaper, and provided with relevant advice.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	Contraceptives are available free of charge from the national health service on prescription. One of the aims of the Sexual Health and HIV Strategy, which was published for consultation in July 2001, is to improve access to contraception and to advise on sexual health. In addition, we have also provided funding to 14 areas to enable them to develop schemes for the free NHS supply of emergency contraception in pharmacies using a patient group direction.
	The Government's Teenage Pregnancy Strategy recognises the importance of helping young people resist peer pressure to have early sex, while seeking to ensure that those who are sexually active have easy access to high quality contraceptive advice. A series of guidance notes have been issued to local teenage pregnancy co-ordinators on improving contraceptive and advice services for young people. Local co-ordinators have audited youth contraceptive services in clinics and general practice against these criteria for effective services in order to identify gaps in service provision and to plan improvements. We are also working closely with the Royal College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Nursing to improve young people's access to contraceptive advice within general practice.

Teenage Pregnancies

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions have taken place with (a) religious groups and (b) youth organisations to agree a strategy to reduce teenage pregnancies.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	Development of the teenage pregnancy strategy was informed by consultation with individuals and organisations representing both young people and a wide range of faiths.
	To ensure ongoing dialogue with faith groups during the implementation of the strategy, the teenage pregnancy unit has established an inter-faith forum involving individuals and organisations from diverse faiths. The forum meets twice a year.
	The teenage pregnancy unit has established a national young people's forum to advise on implementation, which meets three times a year, and undertakes targeted consultations with specific groups of young people. The unit also works closely with voluntary sector organisations representing the interests of young people through its forum for non-statutory organisations.
	Local teenage pregnancy strategies, developed for each top tier local authority area, are also actively involving young people and the wider community. Guidance on involving young people was published and distributed to local teenage pregnancy co-ordinators in 2001. A resource is currently being developed for local teenage pregnancy co-ordinators on working with those from different faiths and cultures, which will be published in the autumn.

Teenage Pregnancies

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has been done since 1997 to reduce the number of teenage pregnancies in the UK.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	After research by the social exclusion unit into the complex causes of teenage pregnancy, a comprehensive, cross-Government teenage pregnancy strategy was launched in 1999. This sets a target to halve the under-18s conception rate by 2010 and aims to increase the participation of teenage parents in education and training to reduce their long term risk of social exclusion.
	The strategy is informed by the best available evidence of what works. This encompasses a multi-faceted approach to help young people resist peer pressure to have early sex, improve sex and relationship education, increase access to effective contraception and sexual health services and support parents in talking to their children about sex and relationship issues.
	The teenage pregnancy unit has been established to implement the strategy. Every top tier local authority area has a local teenage pregnancy strategy and reduction target to underpin the delivery of the national strategy. Local strategies are managed by a teenage pregnancy partnership board, with a lead teenage pregnancy co-ordinator and representation from the local authority, primary care trusts and other key local partners, including the voluntary sector. Over 60 million has been invested across Government during the first three years of implementation. Early signs of the strategy's impact are encouraging with figures for 2000 showing a 6.2 per cent. reduction from 1998 in both under-18 and under-16 conception rates.
	Almost all of the strategy's action points have now been implemented but further work needs to be done to ensure that early progress is sustained. The strategy's independent advisory group has published its first annual report setting out 49 recommendations for further action to underpin implementation of the strategy and delivery of the targets. The Government will publish their response to this report in the summer.
	Action on teenage pregnancy relating to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is a matter for the devolved Administrations.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Access to Information

Tony Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the administrative manuals and internal guidance which her Department has made public as required by Part 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information; and which of these were first made available after May 1997.

Ivan Lewis: Since the Department was constituted in June last year, no internal guidance or administrative manuals have been published.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the mandate of the Leonardo da Vinci Committee is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: The purpose of the Leonardo da Vinci Committee is set out in the Council decision 1999/382/EC of 26 April 1999, which established the second phase of the Leonardo programme. The Leonardo Committee has met three times over the last 12 Months. Travel expenses were met from Commission resources. Two officials from the UK attend the meetings. The subsistence cost incurred by this Department was 1,560.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com(2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the mandate of the Advisory Committee on Vocational Training is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if she will list the items currently under its consideration; if she will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: The Advisory Committee on Vocational Training (ACVT) was established by Council Decision no. 63/266/EEC dated 2 April 1963 which laid down general principles for implementing a common vocational training policy across the EU. Its purpose is to offer advice and submit opinions to the European Commission on vocational training policy which the Commission is obliged to take account of. It has met twice in the last 12 months.
	The UK is represented by two officials from the Department for Education and Skills, the Trade Unions Congress (TUC) and the Confederation of British Industry (CBI).
	Costs to UK public funds were limited to the officials' expenses, approximately 2,660, less any reimbursements provided by the European Commission.
	At its next meeting, ACVT is considering a number of vocational training and related items.
	Together with member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. As an obligation to this Decision, the Commission undertook to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002 (Com(2001)783 Final). As part of the review process, the UK Government has encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Stewart Report

Mark Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what progress she has made on implementing the Stewart report recommendations on the beam of greatest intensity from mobile phone masts and schools on their grounds.

Ivan Lewis: holding answer 16 May 2002
	We have agreed with the network operators that they will provide schools, on request, with information on the level of intensity of radio frequency radiation from a mast on or near their premises. Schools and parents can then make an informed decision as to whether to give their agreement to that operation. We have informed local education authorities and schools of this.

Sick Leave

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many days of sick leave were taken by (a) primary and secondary school teachers and (b) other staff in those schools in the last year for which records are available; and what the cost was.

Stephen Timms: holding answer 20 May 2002
	In the calendar year 2000, full-time teachers in the English maintained schools sector took 2,392,400 days of sick leave 1 , and part-time teachers in the English maintained schools sector took 301,970 days of sick leave. These figures cannot be broken down by phase.
	Provisional 2001 data will be published on 30 May 2002.
	The estimated cost of this lost teacher time 2 is 430 million.
	The Department does not collect information on sick leave taken by non-teaching staff in schools.
	1 Sickness absence on working days, whether paid absence or not, of teachers with permanent contracts or contracts of over one month, including teachers without QTS. The number of days taken as sick leave includes all periods of sick leave.
	2 The cost of a teacher's working day is calculated using estimates of teacher salaries and additional teacher costs in 2000.

School Exclusions

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the financial consequence is to a secondary school of excluding a pupil.

Ivan Lewis: The Pupil Retention Grant (PRG) is part of the Social Inclusion: Pupil Support (SIPS) grant which is available to tackle disaffection in schools and to provide education outside school. It is available only to secondary pupils.
	PRG has given secondary schools significant additional resources to tackle poor behaviour, while at the same time ensuring that when pupils are excluded LEAs have the resources they need to provide alternative education. In 200102, we increased the PRG to 122 million from 100 million in 200001. LEAs must allocate the PRG direct to schools.
	Where permanent exclusion has taken place, a child will still need to be educated. In these cases the exclusion will trigger the transfer of at least some of the PRG from the school to the LEA as a contribution to the education of that child. The LEA has flexibility about the amount it will seek to transfer back from the school that it negotiates with head teachers. On average, between 3,0006,000 will be deducted from the excluded school's budget allocation per excludee.
	The LEA can then use the PRG to provide education outside of school and/or support a reintegration package at a new school, helping to ensure that full-time education really does become a reality for excluded children and young people. Schools accepting pupils previously excluded from other schools should therefore benefit from these additional funds. This procedure follows the principle introduced by the last Government of money following the excluded pupil.

Truancy

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many parents have been prosecuted in each of the last 10 years for failing to send their children to school; and what the average fine was for parents who have been successfully prosecuted and fined.

Ivan Lewis: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner) on 7 May 2002, Official Report, column 90W.

After School Clubs

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many (a) after school and (b) holiday clubs have been (i) closed, (ii) established and (iii) supported by funding from her Department on the Isle of Wight in each year since 1997.

Margaret Hodge: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The information is not available in the form requested, statistics are gathered in the form of the number of places rather than the number of clubs (as the size of clubs varies considerably).
	Since April 1999 local Early Years Development and Childcare Partnerships (EYDCPs) have provided information on all the new child care places that have been established and all those that close within their local area. Between April 1999 and December 2001, Isle of Wight EYDCP has reported the creation of 515 out of school places and 202 holiday only places. During the same period the EYDCP reported the closure of 45 out of school places. The year on year breakdown is set out in the table.
	
		
			  19992000 200001 April to December 2001 
		
		
			 New places
			 Out of school(27) 270 138 107 
			 Holiday only 42 44 116 
			 Closed places
			 Out of school(27) 0 0 45 
			 Holiday only 0 0 0 
		
	
	(27) The data on out of school places includes before and after school places and all year round provision.
	Detailed information prior to April 1999 is not available.
	Funding for out of school and holiday clubs is provided by the New Opportunities Fund. Since April 1999 the New Opportunities Fund has made seven awards totalling 289,262 specifically to support out of school child care projects in the Isle of Wight.
	In addition infrastructure support funding is provided by the Government through the child care grant made available to EYDCPs who are tasked with providing and supporting good quality, affordable child care in their respective areas. The annual child care grant allocations to Isle of Wight EYDCP since April 1999 are set out in the table.
	
		 
		
			   Child care grant allocation 
		
		
			 19992000 99,400 
			 200001 124,740 
			 200102 299,650

After School Clubs

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many (a) after school and (b) holiday clubs achieved financial sustainability within three years; and what steps she is taking to ensure that new clubs are not set up at the expense of those already in existence.

Margaret Hodge: holding answer 20 May 2002
	Early Years Development and Childcare Partnerships have been given the target of ensuring that a minimum of 80 per cent. of all New Opportunities Fund sponsored out of school child care places remain viable and available five years after being established. The Fund has rigorous assessment procedures in place to ensure that funded projects have sound plans to ensure long term sustainability. The current position is that 90 per cent. of places opened are still in operation, irrespective of whether they are still receiving funding support, and we are well on track to achieve our sustainability target.
	The available figures for sustainability do not separately identify after school and holiday clubs.
	EYDCPs are responsible for planning and co-ordinating child care in their areas; ensuring that available funding is targeted in locations where there is a shortfall in provision to avoid conflicting with existing provision: and keep provision and demand under continuous review.

Nursery Provision (Lancashire)

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many nursery places have been available in Lancashire in each year since 1997.

Margaret Hodge: holding answer 20 May 2002
	The available information is shown in the table.
	
		Table 1: Number of places at day nurseries(28) -- England and Lancashire local authority area 19972001
		
			 Position as at 31 March each year England Lancashire local authority area 
		
		
			 1997 193,800 (29)9,900 
			 1998 223,000 (30) 
			 1999 247,700 8,800 
			 2000 264,200 9,600 
			 2001 285,100 10,900 
		
	
	(28) Figures have been rounded to the nearest hundred.
	(29) Includes Blackburn and Darwen and Blackpool.
	(30) Not available.
	The figures are as returned by local authorities. Figures for Lancashire local authority area for 19992001 are not directly comparable with 1997 because they do not include Blackburn and Darwen and Blackpool local authority areas.
	The latest figures on day care facilities in England were published by my Department in Statistical Bulletin 08/01 Children's Day Care facilities at 31 March 2001 in October 2001, a copy of which is available from the Library. An electronic copy of this publication is also available on my Department's web-site www.dfes.gov.uk/ statistics.
	The increase in the number of day nursery places ensures that a wide choice of child care provision is available to parents. We expect this trend to continue with the creation of 45,000 places in neighbourhood nurseries (equivalent to 900 new 50 place nurseries) in disadvantaged areas.

Faith-based Academies

Phil Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills where an academy is created involving (a) the Church Schools Company and (b) any other faith-based organisation, whether the school will be allowed to select and dismiss teachers in accordance with sections 58 to 60 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.

Stephen Timms: Employment law allows any school with a religious characterwhether maintained or independentto take into account in appointing or promoting teaching staff, their ability to promote the religious character of the school. Where an academy has a religious character, we would consider proposals to include provisions in the funding agreement analogous to the provisions of sections 58 to 60 of the School Standards and Framework Act as these apply to aided schools with a religious character. This would include the parts of sections 5860 which allow governing bodies of maintained schools to dismiss teachers appointed to give religious education in accordance with the character of the school, where they fail to do so efficiently and suitably.

Teaching Assistants

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans she has to ensure that teaching assistants receive adequate ongoing training throughout their careers.

Stephen Timms: Induction training was introduced for newly-recruited teaching assistants in 2000, funded by the DfES. National Vocational Qualifications, based on the new National Occupational Standards for Teaching Assistants, are expected to be in place later this year. Training opportunities are being considered as part of wider work on the development of new roles and career structures for teaching assistants and other school support staff, which will be the subject of consultation later this year.

Teaching Assistants

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans she has to introduce a career structure for teaching assistants.

Stephen Timms: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) on 29 April 2002, Official Report, columns 57980W.

Teaching Assistants

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps she has taken to encourage more people to enter into a career as a teaching assistant.

Stephen Timms: A working party involving representatives of teachers and support staff, the local government employers and other Government bodies, is currently considering the roles, responsibilities and career development of teaching assistants and other school support staff. Proposals for improving career structures for support staff will be published in a consultation paper later this year. Provisional figures for January 2002 show that the number of teaching assistants in maintained schools is 103,624, an increase of 61 per cent. since 1998, and that the Government's target for increasing the number of school support staff by 20,000 in this Parliament was exceeded by 6,000, four years early.

Teaching Assistants

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when she expects the School Workforce Remodelling Working Party to report.

Stephen Timms: The School Workforce Remodelling Working Party was not set up to work towards a report. Rather, it was established last December so that key stakeholders could meet to consider issues raised by the Secretary of State in her Social Market Foundation pamphletProfessionalism and Trust.
	The Working Party's debates have been wide-ranging, from the future deployment of teaching assistants through to reforms to teachers' contracts to deal with workload issues and the status of the teaching profession. The Working Party will shortly be debating the report on teacher workload from the School Teachers' Review Body which we published on 8 May.

SCOTLAND

National Insurance Contributions

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what the reasons were for the delay in answering the question from the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight on budget changes to employers' national insurance contributions tabled on 22 April, ref: 52079.

Helen Liddell: An oversight by my parliamentary branch.

TREASURY

EU Energy Tax

Andrew Stunell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 22 April 2002, Official Report, column 94W, on what dates since June 2001 (a) Ministers and (b) officials have met their EU counterparts to discuss the proposed EU energy tax.

Paul Boateng: The proposed energy products directive has been discussed at meetings of the Council of Economic and Finance Ministers (ECOFIN) taking place on 5 June, 22 September and 13 December 2001 and associated preparatory meetings of permanent representatives (COREPER).
	The Financial Questions Group, a working group of officials, has discussed proposals for the energy products directive. It has met on 17 July, 18 September, 23 October and 27 November 2001, and 14 February, 7 March and 17 April 2002.

Beer Duty

Nigel Jones: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on how many European Union states apply a reduced rate of duty on beer for small brewers; and on which states apply the reduced rate up to the maximum production level of 200,000 hectolitres allowable under EU law.

Paul Boateng: Seven other member states apply reduced rates of duty based on brewers' production levels. Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg and Portugal offer a degree of relief up to the maximum production level allowable under EU law.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Bob Blizzard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he will begin consultation on his proposal to abolish royalty tax on the oil and gas industry; and how long the consultation period will last.

Peter Duncan: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the timetable is for reviewing the royalty tax on oil revenues.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government will publish a consultation paper shortly.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Bob Blizzard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what research he has commissioned on the effect of the supplementary charge and 100 per cent. first year capital allowances on expected monetary values of oil and gas assets and investments in the UK;
	(2)  what assumptions about future levels of investment in the UK by the oil and gas industry underlie his estimates of the additional revenue raised from the supplementary charge on corporation tax.

Dawn Primarolo: A full analysis was made of reform's effect on investment. The Government examined the impact on all investment, exploration and appraised development projects that had already commenced, probable and possible developments on new fields that had already been discovered, and incremental developments of fields already in production.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Bob Blizzard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his estimate is of the additional revenue that will be raised from the supplementary charge on the oil and gas industry between 2006 and 2010.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government do not publish such estimates. The overall impact of the Budget measures are taken into account in the forecasts of the economy and public finances as set out in the Financial Statement and Budget Report.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Bob Blizzard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish the analysis of the effect of changes in taxation of the oil and gas industry on (a) investment, (b) exploration and appraisal and (c) developments referred to in the oral statement by the Economic Secretary of 9 May 2002, Official Report, column 362.

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what study he has made of the effect on the (a) timing and (b) number of North sea oil and gas projects of tax changes introduced in the Budget.

Dawn Primarolo: A full analysis was made of reform's effect on investment. The Government examined the impact on all investment, exploration and appraisal development projects that had already commenced, probably and possible developments on new fields that had already been discovered, and incremental developments of fields already in production. Such information is commercially sensitive and it would be inappropriate to make it public, as provided for in exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many representations he has received from non-UK oil companies operating in the North sea on the effects of preventing companies from claiming funding costs against profits under the Budget tax changes on their overall liability for tax.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government have received a number of representations from a variety of organisations regarding the Budget.

Oil and Gas Industry (Taxation)

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will review the effect of the decision not to allow financing costs against profits when assessing the 10 per cent. budget tax levy on North sea profits.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government keep all taxes under review.

Corporation Tax

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his estimate is of the effect which corporation tax changes announced in the Budget of 2002 will have on UK small businesses which are (a) incorporated and (b) unincorporated.

Dawn Primarolo: As set out in Budget 2002 cutting the corporation tax starting rate and the small companies rate will benefit around 485,000 smaller companies. An average small company will save around 700 a year.

Non-domiciled Tax Status

David Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the review of non-domiciled tax status; who is leading this review; and what its remit is.

Dawn Primarolo: The Chancellor announced a review of the residence and domicile rules as they affect the tax liabilities of individuals in his Budget statement. As paragraph 5.83 of the Financial Statement and Budget Report makes clear, we believe that modernisation of these rules needs to be based on clear principles: the rules should be fair, clear, easy to operate and support the competitiveness of the British economy.

National Insurance Contributions

Angela Browning: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the impact of the increased employers' NI contribution on charities.

Dawn Primarolo: It is estimated that the changes to employer NICs announced in the Budget will add around 0.7 per cent. to pay costs on average next year. The changes will help to fund improvements to public services and a real terms increase in spending on health over the next five years of over 40 per cent.

VAT (Charities)

Angela Browning: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received to waive value added tax payments for charities; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Boateng: The Government have received a number of representations about VAT and charities. The Government regularly discuss taxation issues with the charitable sector.

LORD CHANCELLOR

Succession to Titles

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if the Lord Chancellor will take steps to amend the law relating to succession to titles to allow equality of rights to succeed between men and women.

Michael Wills: There are no plans to legislate in this area.

Law Enforcement Agencies

Andrew Turner: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what statutory law enforcement agencies and prosecuting authorities there are within the responsibility of his Department; and what complaints procedure is available for each.

Michael Wills: The Information Commissioner exercises her statutory enforcement powers and brings prosecutions independently of the Government, but is sponsored by my Department. A new, two stage, complaints procedure, designed to ensure that all complaints are dealt with expeditiously by a senior member of staff, and the most serious ones by a Deputy Commissioner or the Commissioner herself, is about to be implemented.
	While there are no enforcement agencies as such within the civil and family courts and Supreme Court, there are county court bailiffs employed by the Court Service as part of the civil service structure, and Sheriffs Officers who are not employed by the Court Service but are authorised to act for the Supreme Court. The complaints procedures for county court bailiffs and Sheriffs Officers are set out in a public leaflet available in all courts.
	There are no prosecuting agencies within the civil and family courts system.

Libra Project

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, how much money additional to that already committed the Libra IT system will require before it is operational.

Michael Wills: The Office Infrastructure has operated since October 2000 and is now in use in more than 70 per cent. of the magistrates court offices. The software application was not delivered on the planned date of July 2001. The contract is currently under renegotiation and it is not yet possible to indicate the outcome.

Libra Project

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what contractual obligations there are in the Libra IT deal with Fujitsu that would require it to fund an overspend.

Michael Wills: There is no obligation within the current contract with Fujitsu Services that would require the Department to fund an overspend.

Libra Project

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if his Department recommended Fujitsu for the Libra IT deal.

Michael Wills: Fujitsu (then ICL) were selected through a formal evaluation, which conformed to procurement laws and guidelines. The evaluation was carried out by staff from LCD and the magistrates court service supported by independent advisers.

Libra Project

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when he expects the Libra IT system to be up and running; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: The Libra IT system consists of two elements. The office infrastructure has been progressively installed and used across the country since late 2000 and is now more than 70 per cent. complete. The software application was due to begin rollout in July 2001 but was delayed. We are currently in negotiation with the suppliers, Fujitsu Services about this matter.

Libra Project

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many computer companies bid for the Libra contract in 1997.

Michael Wills: Two companies went forward to the final stage of the competition in 1997 for Libra but one withdrew at a late stage and only one formal bid was received.

Consultants

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what the total cost to his Department was of the use of external consultants in each of the last four years.

Michael Wills: The Department's net expenditure with external consultants over the past four years was:
	
		 million 
		
			  Expenditure 
		
		
			 199899 1.2 
			 19992000 1.9 
			 200001 2.6 
			 200103 6.5 
		
	
	The recent increase reflects a wide-ranging and fast paced programme to modernise the courts and the tribunal system to increase efficiency, provide better customer service, and value for money for the tax payer.
	Delivering such a programme has necessitated the use of external expertise and skills to supplement the Department's own resources.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what the mandate of the Committee on the Protection of Individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: This is the committee of representatives of EU member states' Governments, which is established by Article 31 of the EC Data Protection directive (95/46/EC). Its mandate is to assist the European Commission in taking decisions relating to the adequacy of data protection in countries outside the European Union. Meetings of the committee are also used by the Commission to keep member states informed about other matters relating to the directive.
	In the 12 months ending 30 April 2002, the committee met three times. The UK representation is provided by an official from my Department. The total cost to the Department of the meetings mentioned above is estimated at 1,100.
	The committee currently has before it no draft Commission decisions, but the Commission is keeping the committee informed of matters that the Commission has under consideration. These include discussions with the United States authorities about the adequacy of US data protection laws for the financial sector; consideration of the adequacy of data protection in Argentina; and the Commission's future report on the implementation of directive 95/46/EC. The United Kingdom has also asked the Commission to consider an adequacy decision for the recently adopted Guernsey data protection law.
	Together with the member states, the Commission is currently conducting a review to bring existing legislation on the conduct of comitology committees into line with Council Decision 1999/468/EC to simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. There is an obligation under this decision for the Commission to publish an annual report on the working of committees. The first report (Com(2001)783 Final) was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 26 February 2002. As part of the review process, the UK Government have encouraged the Commission to produce and maintain an electronic database of every comitology committee, its agendas and recent actions, to be accessible through its website.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what the mandate of the group on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: The group is the Working Party of EU member states' independent data protection supervisory authorities, which is set up under Article 29 of the EC Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC). Its mandate is to examine questions about the application of national measures adopted under the directive; to give the European Commission opinions on the level of data protection in the European Community and in third countries; to advise the Commission on any proposed amendments of the directive, and on other data protection matters; and to give opinions on data protection codes of practice drawn up at Community level.
	In the 12 months ending 30 April 2002, the Working Party met four times. In the same period there were also six meetings of sub-groups at which the UK was represented. The UK representation is provided by staff from the Office of the Information Commissioner. The total cost to the Commissioner's office of the meetings mentioned above is estimated at 6,800. The Working Party is currently considering a wide range of matters including the effect of certain provisions of the directive; the data protection implications of certain draft EU instruments; various draft codes of practices; and various requests which the European Commission have received for formal decisions relating to the adequacy of data protection in third countries.
	A new regulation on public access to EU documents, fully supported by the UK, came into force in December 2001. It provides a clear and effective mechanism for any interested party to request access to documents of the European institutions, including the Commission. As the committee in question is an advisory body to the Commission, its conclusions are covered by that regulation.

Sick Leave

Oliver Heald: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many days of sick leave were taken in her Department last year; how many related to employees suffering (a) stress and (b) other mental health problems; and what the cost was to her Department.

Rosie Winterton: The most recently published annual report Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service records the number of working days lost through sickness absence in the Lord Chancellor's Department as 10 working days per staff year for the calendar year 2000.
	A recent analysis of sick absence by type indicates that around 23 per cent. of all sick absence in the Department is due to stress, depression or anxiety-related illnesses. We are unable accurately to cost this figure.
	The Department is committed to managing sickness absence effectively. A great deal of work has been undertaken to raise awareness of our Service Delivery Agreement targets, of the need to manage attendance in accordance with best practice policies, and to reduce absence due to work related injuries and illness in line with the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.

Jury Central Summoning Bureau

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department for what reason the Jury Central Summoning Bureau in Pocock Street SE1 is using last year's electoral roll for Thurrock when selecting jurors; what year's electoral rolls are being used for these purposes in respect of other local authority areas; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: Last year's electoral rolls are being used for summoning jurors in all areas of England and Wales.
	Current data from local authorities is still being received, checked and collated before entry on to the system. This will begin, for those areas where data sets are complete, in the near future although specific dates have yet to be arranged.

Jury Central Summoning Bureau

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on the cause and extent of delay in the despatch of summons following their issue by the summoning officer at the Jury Central Summoning Bureau based at Pocock Street, London; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: Summonses are sent by electronic transfer from the Bureau to a print centre for despatch by second class post within 2 working days of generation.
	Confusion has arisen because summonses were endorsed with the date on which they were generated rather than the date on which they were despatched. The anticipated date of despatch, 2 days after generation, has been endorsed on summonses since 7 May to overcome this.

Land Charges Registers

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what duties are placed on local authorities with regard to maintaining their land charges register.

Michael Wills: The duties of local authorities in relation to the maintenance of their local land charges register are set out in the Local Land Charges Act 1975 and the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985).

Land Charges Registers

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what guidelines he has issued to local authorities with regard to levels of payment due for public access to local authority land charges registers.

Michael Wills: No guidelines have been issued with regard to levels of payment due for public access to local land charges registers.

Land Charges Registers

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what statutory provision governs access to local authority land charges registers.

Michael Wills: Access to the local land charges register is governed by the Local Land Charges Act 1975 and the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985).

Land Charges Registers

Nick Hawkins: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what analysis he has made of local authorities' charges for access to their land records and their opening of their records for public inspection; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: None. Charges for access to the register of local land charges are prescribed by the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985). These charges were last revised in 1998 (SI 1998 No. 1190). Records open to public inspection and held by local authorities may be inspected free of charge. These records include the planning register and the register of enforcement notices, stop notices and breach of condition notices (Town and Country Planning Act 1990, ss 69 and 188). Other records open to public inspection relating to land include maps of public sewers, publicly adopted highways, and public rights of way (Water Industry Act 1991, ss 199 and 200; Highways Act 1980 s 36(7); and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, s 57(5) respectively). A local authority must behave reasonably in fulfilling its duty to allow access to public records. If reasonable access is denied the matter may be referred to the courts or the local government ombudsman. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 will improve the rights of individuals to have access to information, and provide a right to complain to the Information Commissioner if access is prevented. The Act is expected to come into force in relation to information held by local government on 1 January 2005.

Legal Searches

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what the statutory requirement is for provision of public access to local authority information as found on the forms (a) CON 29, Inquiries of Local Authorities and (b) LLC1, Requisition and Certificate of Search.

Michael Wills: Some of the information contained in answers to questions in CON 29 is available from public records that are held by local authorities. Local authorities are under a statutory duty to allow public inspection, free of charge, to these records. In the case of the planning register, for example, sections 69, 188 and 214 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 require local authorities to make the register available for inspection by the public at all reasonable hours. The statutory requirement for the provisions of public access to the register of local land charges is set out in the Local Land Charges Act 1975 and the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985).

Legal Searches

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what guidelines he has issued to local authorities with regard to charging for searches based on the forms (a) CON 29, Inquiries of Local Authorities and (b) LLC1, Requisition and Certificate of Search.

Michael Wills: The Local Authorities (Charges for Land Searches) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994 No. 1885) give local authorities the power to charge for CON 29 inquiries. The regulations provide that these charges are at the local authority's discretion but should have regard to its costs in dealing with inquiries. Fees for searches of a local charges register are prescribed by the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985).

Legal Searches

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to amend (a) the forms (i) CON 29, Inquiries of Local Authorities and (ii) LLC1, Requisition and Certificate of Search and (b) the regulations and guidelines associated with them; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: CON 29 is not a statutory form. The Local Government Association and The Law Society have recently revised CON 29. The new version will be brought into use on 1 July 2002. I have lodged a copy of the draft of the revised form in the Library of the House of Commons.
	Form LLC 1 'Register of Local Land Charges Requisition for Search and Official Certificate of Search' is a prescribed form (see Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985)). The Government have no plans to amend it or the regulations relating to it.

Legal Searches

Theresa May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what the required contents are of forms (a) CON 29, Inquiries of Local Authorities and (b) LLC1, Requisition and Certificate of Search; and what their status is.

Michael Wills: CON 29 is not a statutory form and is not subject to any statutory requirements as to content. The contents are agreed between local authorities and The Law Society. I have lodged a copy of the current form CON 29 in the Library of the House of Commons. The contents of form LLC1 (Register of Local Land Charges, Requisition for Search and Official Certificate of Search) are prescribed by the Local Land Charges Rules 1977 (SI 1977 No. 985).

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Unpaid Advisers

Alan Beith: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, pursuant to the answer of 26 March, Official Report, column 828W, what the (a) names and (b) responsibilities are of unpaid advisers who have assisted the work of his Department since June 1997 but are not included in the Cabinet Office's annual report Task Forces, Ad Hoc Advisory Groups and Reviews 200001.

Christopher Leslie: As my answer to the right hon. Gentleman of 26 March made clear, Ministers in this Department have not appointed any unpaid advisers other than those accounted for in the list of task forces, reviews and other ad hoc advisory groups.

Review Bodies

Graham Allen: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  if he plans to improve the opportunities for (a) members of the House and (b) members of the public to become members of task forces and other ad hoc and review bodies;
	(2)  what the membership is of task forces and other ad hoc advisory and review bodies broken down into (a) public servants, (b) members of the House of Commons, (c) members of the Houses of Lords, (d) representatives of business, (e) representatives of trade unions, (f) representatives of consumers, (g) representatives of the voluntary sector, (h) representatives of local government and (i) volunteers for public appointments on the list maintained by the Cabinet Office;
	(3)  if he plans to (a) increase public knowledge of task forces and other ad hoc and review bodies, with particular reference to when they are first appointed, and (b) invite greater contributions from the general public to their work.

Christopher Leslie: The Cabinet Office's annual report on task forces, ad hoc advisory groups and reviews was produced in October 2001 and a copy is in the Library.
	The report contains details of the date of establishment of each body, as well as the membership of each, broken down into Ministers, civil servants, wider public servants, volunteers or charity workers and others, including private sector members. Information on the numbers of members who are Lords, representatives of trade unions and representatives of consumers specifically is not recorded. There is no restriction on Members of Parliament or members of the public being appointed to a task force, ad hoc advisory body or review, subject to any actual or perceived conflict of interest.
	Task forces, ad hoc advisory groups and reviews are, by their nature, created to provide advice on a particular subject or subject area. However, in order to carry out their functions, their memberships will consist of those best able because of their position, knowledge or experience, or best qualified to contribute. Individual Departments are responsible for announcing, setting up and organising the membership of these bodies as required.
	The Government remain committed to increasing the involvement of people and groups in public consultations, which play an important part in improving the way new policies are developed and how new services are provided. The Code of Practice on written consultation published by Cabinet Office sets out new standards for consultation documents issued by the Government aimed at making it easier for people to put their views forward to ensure a wider range of views is heard in making decisions.

Better Regulation Task Force

Graham Allen: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister who the members of the Better Regulation Task Force are; what their other occupations are; and what the date of their appointment was.

Christopher Leslie: The Chairman of the Better Regulation Task Force (BRTF), David Arculus, was appointed on 1 April 2002. The other 15 members were appointed on 29 April 2002. A list of their names and principal organisation is as follows:
	David Arculus, ChairChair, Severn Trent plc
	Teresa Graham, Deputy ChairPartner, Barker Tilly
	Matti AldersonDirector, FireHorses Ltd.
	Stephen FalderMarketing Director, HMG Paints
	Michael GibbonsFormerly Director of UK Communications, Powergen plc
	Kevin HawkingDirector of Communications, Safeway Stores plc
	Deirdre HuttonChair, National Consumer Council
	Simon PetchGeneral Secretary, CONNECT
	Ian PetersDirector of External Affairs and Marketing, Engineering Employers Federation
	Penelope RowlattIndependent economist
	Janet RussellDirector of Environment and Transport, Kirklees Metropolitan borough council
	Sukhvinder StubbsDirector, Barrow Cadbury Trust
	Tim SweeneyIndependent consultant: financial services
	Barbara ThomasPrivate Enquity Investor plc
	Simon WardIndependent consultant: hospitality industry.
	A Register of members' interests is available on the Task Force website at http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/ regulation/TaskForce/members.htm.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the mandate of the Committee on the Community Action Programme in the field of civil protection is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

Christopher Leslie: The mandate of Committee for the Action Programme and for the Mechanism in the Field of Civil Protection, which is composed of representatives of all the member states and is chaired by a representative of the Commission, is to implement the Community Action Programme.
	The UK currently has two projects under consideration for funding, one each from the Home Office and the Red Cross.
	The committee has met five times in the past 12 months, and a member of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat of the Cabinet Office represents the UK.
	The Committee comes under the remit of the Community Mechanism to facilitate reinforced co-operation in civil protection assistance interventions. This has been subject to scrutiny by Parliament. The Committee's work is made known to the Emergency Planning community throughout the European Union and reports are available on EU websites.
	The costs to public fund are included in the total running costs of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat and could be provided only at disproportionate costs.

Charities and Voluntary Bodies (Funding)

Graham Allen: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what representations he has received from charities and voluntary bodies about the administrative burden applying to funding sources from national and local government and other bodies with different (a) timetables, (b) criteria and (c) monitoring systems; and what plans he has to ease this burden.

Barbara Roche: There are several linked initiatives taking place across Government aimed at easing the administrative burdens that may face voluntary and community sector bodies when they apply for funding.
	The Regional Co-ordination Unit (RCU) of the Cabinet Office has undertaken a study to explore how regeneration and community funding can be made more accessible.
	In addition the Home Office's Active Community Unit (ACU) is developing a pilot website to provide information on grants available to voluntary and community sector organisations. This is part of a wider ACU exercise aimed at introducing a more integrated and accessible approach to the Government funding of community groups, particularly small grant schemes.
	The Regional Co-ordination Unit has, since October 2001, been carrying out a series of reviews to better co-ordinate and rationalise central Government initiatives targeted on areas of deprivation, many of which involve voluntary agencies in delivering services or working in partnership with statutory agencies.
	In each of these initiatives, representatives from the sector have been closely involved in shaping conclusions and recommendations.

WORK AND PENSIONS

PPP/PFI

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what the difference was between the price offered in reaching preferred bidder stage and the final contract price for the five largest PFI contracts let by his Department in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what the difference was between the price offered in reaching preferred bidder stage and the final contract price for PPP contracts let by his Department in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement.

Malcolm Wicks: holding answer 25 March 2002
	A preferred bidder stage was used to cover seven of the nine PPP deals managed by this Department and let in the last four years. Of these seven PPP deals, five are also PFIs. Details of the use of the preferred bidder stage in letting these deals are provided below.
	Five PPP deals for IS/IT support, of which three are also PFIs, have been let to date under the ACCORD Project. For evaluation purposes, ACCORD used the preferred bidder stage for the initial selection of partners against a set of typical service package scenarios. Ultimate business allocations, such as Child Support Reform support, which make up the five deals, were always likely to be packaged differently and this proved to be the case. There is therefore no simple correlation between prices offered at preferred bidder stage and final prices for individual business allocations. The ACCORD framework provides for internal competition to select suppliers for individual business allocations and secure value for money. Further to such internal competition ongoing value for money is established by means of independent benchmarking of suppliers prices.
	The procurement leading to the PRIME PPP/PFI deal covering ex-DSS estate ownership and management and let in April 1998 selected Partnership Property Management (now Land Securities Trillium) as preferred bidder. At the selection of preferred bidder stage the price offered was 1.93 billion. In subsequent negotiation it was agreed to re-measure the estate and as a result the scope of the deal increased, other service improvements were also secured. These changes resulted in the price increasing by 78 million. The PRIME procurement was examined by the NAO in 1999 and the resulting deal was considered to represent value for money.
	The Employment Service procurement leading to the PPP/PFI contract for human resources services, including payroll and personnel administration, selected the joint proposal from Rebus Resources Services and Norwich Systems Accounting as the preferred bid. Subsequent negotiations to final contract, awarded in February 1999, secured a reduction of 530,000 in price over the term of the contract.

Overseas Pensioners

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  how many British pensioners living overseas do not have their basic state pension uprated annually in line with inflation according to their country of residence;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on the age profile of British pensioners living overseas in countries with which the UK does not have a reciprocal agreement to uprate pensions annually in line with inflation;
	(3)  what recent assessment he has made of the costs involved in uprating the pensions of British pensioners overseas in line with inflation in those countries with which the UK does not have a reciprocal agreement;
	(4)  how many British pensioners living overseas are in receipt of the basic state pension; and what percentage of total spending on the basic state pension has payment to British pensioners overseas represented in each year since 1997.

Ian McCartney: Such information as is available is as follows.
	The UK state pension is paid to those who satisfy the qualifying conditions, which do not include nationality. The information requested on numbers of pensioners who do not receive annual uprating is contained in Table RP4 of the Retirement Pension Summary of StatisticsSeptember 2001, a copy of which is available in the Library. Costs involved in uprating the pensions of British pensioners overseas will depend on the outcome of the current Judicial Review.
	
		A breakdown of pensioners in receipt of a British state pension in frozen rate countries by sex and age(31) -- Thousand
		
			 Age All Female Male 
		
		
			 All 478.9 287.9 191.0 
			 60 5.4 5.4  
			 61 7.4 7.4  
			 62 9.2 9.2  
			 63 10.1 10.1  
			 64 11.6 11.6  
			 65 21.2 11.5 9.7 
			 66 23.2 12.4 10.8 
			 67 22.4 11.8 10.5 
			 68 23.7 12.5 11.1 
			 69 23.5 12.3 11.2 
			 70 23.6 12.8 10.8 
			 71 24.3 12.4 11.8 
			 72 23.7 12.3 11.4 
			 73 22.8 12.8 10.0 
			 74 21.3 11.7 9.6 
			 75 22.6 13.1 9.5 
			 76 21.8 11.9 9.9 
			 77 19.9 11.7 8.2 
			 78 19.1 10.2 8.8 
			 79 18.8 10.3 8.5 
			 80 17.6 10.3 7.3 
			 81 18.5 10.4 8.1 
			 82 10.0 6.0 4.0 
			 83 8.5 4.8 3.7 
			 84 8.2 5.0 3.2 
			 85 7.6 4.5 3.1 
			 86 7.2 4.8 2.5 
			 87 5.1 3.3 1.8 
			 88 4.7 3.2 1.5 
			 89 3.7 2.5 1.2 
			 90 3.0 2.2 0.8 
			 91 2.3 1.7 0.6 
			 92 1.8 1.4 (32)0.4 
			 93 1.1 0.9 (32)0.2 
			 94 1.3 1.0 (32)0.3 
			 95 0.6 0.5 (32)0.1 
			 96 (32)0.5 (32)0.4 (32)0.1 
			 97 (32)0.5 (32)0.4 (32)0.1 
			 98 (32)0.3 (32)0.3  
			 99 (32)0.3 (32)0.2  
			 100 and over 0.5 (32)0.5 (32)0.1 
		
	
	(31) Figures are rounded to the nearest hundred; totals may not sum due to rounding.
	(32) Figures subject to high degree of sampling error and should only be used as a guide to the correct situation.
	
		
			   Number of pensioners living overseas (thousand)  Percentage of total BSP expenditure 
		
		
			 1997 740 3.6 
			 1998 770 3.6 
			 1999 790 3.7 
			 2000 810 3.8 
			 2001 840 3.9 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures rounded to nearest 10,000.
	2. Taken from March administrative data.
	3. Figures exclude those in receipt of additional pension/graduated retirement benefit only.
	4. Figures exclude Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands.

Disability Living Allowance

Archy Kirkwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what progress has been made with his project on modernisation of disability living allowance.

Maria Eagle: We are delivering our commitment to modernise disability living allowance (DLA) by introducing a system of active case management which ensures that entitlements are right at the outset and remain right.
	We are ensuring that the period for which disability living allowance is awarded more appropriately reflects the effects of the customer's disability. As a result the majority of DLA awards are now for a fixed period, and therefore subject to later renewal and review. In addition, in June 1999, we introduced a system of periodic inquiry to ensure that longer term awards remained correct. In April 2002 we introduced refinements to the periodic inquiry process to focus more effort on those cases with the greatest likelihood of incorrectness.
	Extensive work has already been done to shorten and simplify the claiming process for disability living allowance. A shorter claim pack, reduced by 10 pages, was introduced in April 2001 and tests of a new attendance allowance claim pack for people aged 75 and over, which is currently taking place, shows that further significant shortening of the claim pack used for extra cost disability benefits is possible. From September 2002 it is planned to test a significantly shortened disability living allowance claim pack tailored to the needs of individual customers, as part of a new streamlined claim process.
	New report forms to enable general practitioners and Examining Medical Officers to provide clinical rather than subjective medical information about customers are being introduced. These are currently being developed and tested and subject to the satisfactory evaluation of live testing will be rolled out nationally commencing with the general practitioner form in June 2002.
	Staff involved in the DLA decision making process are receiving specialist training on disability awareness and the initial training programme is due to be completed by the end of December. Two additional modules to the programme are now being developed and delivery to staff is due to commence later this year.
	We are continuing to examine the feasibility of making greater use of health care professionals in the decision making process.

Fraud and Improprieties

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff in his Department are involved in work to investigate suspicions of fraud from his Department's vote 1 budget.

Malcolm Wicks: The overall aim of the Department's anti-fraud strategy is to have a benefit system which is secure from first claim to final payment.
	The implementation of this strategy means that an anti-fraud focus is integral to the work of all staff in the Department, as is dealing with the wider agenda of error and incorrectness in benefit payments.
	The number of the Department's staff employed at 31 March 2002 specifically in work to investigate suspicions of fraud in the areas previously covered 1 by the Department's vote 1 budget was 5,469.
	1 As a result of the introduction of Resource Accounting and Budgeting the Department moved from three votes to one departmental vote on 1 April 2001. The last vote 1 and vote 2 accounts were for the 200001 financial year.
	Source:
	Professional Standards Unit. Figure includes investigators and dedicated administrative support staff.

Fraud and Improprieties

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff were employed undertaking specific work on counter fraud policy issues from his Department's vote 2 budget on 8 April.

Malcolm Wicks: The overall aim of the Department's anti-fraud strategy is to have a benefit system which is secure from first claim to final payment.
	The implementation of this strategy means that an anti-fraud focus is integral to the work of all staff in the Department, as is dealing with the wider agenda of error and incorrectness in benefit payments.
	As a result of the introduction of Resource Accounting and Budgeting the Department moved from three votes to one departmental vote on 1 April 2001. The last vote 1 and vote 2 accounts were for the 200001 financial year.

Fraud and Improprieties

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff in (a) his Department and (b) each of its agencies (i) were disciplined, (ii) resigned and (iii) were dismissed after suspicions of fraud or corruption arose in 200001.

Malcolm Wicks: The Department treats very seriously any suspicions of fraud or corruption by its officers and takes firm action in any cases that arise.
	No instances of corruption were identified in 200001. Information on cases where misconduct as a consequence of fraud was identified in 200001 is in the table.
	
		
			   Number of cases 
		
		
			 Benefits Agency 65 
			 Departmental directorates 10 
			 War Pensions Agency 2 
			 Child Support Agency 5 
			 The Appeals Service 0 
			 Employment Service 26 
			  
			 Total 108 
		
	
	Note:
	DWP was only formed in 200102 and the Employment Service was formerly part of the Department for Education and Employment.
	Information on the outcomes of cases in 200001 is in the following table.
	
		
			   Disciplinary penalty  Dismissed  Resigned  Other(33) 
		
		
			 Benefits Agency 31 14 9 11 
			 Departmental directorates 9 0 0 1 
			 War Pensions Agency 0 0 1 1 
			 Child Support Agency 0 0 2 3 
			 The Appeals Service 0 0 0 0 
			 Employment Service 19 5 2 0 
			 Total 59 19 14 16 
		
	
	(33) Including cases not proven, not culpable, not yet decided, those where no further action has been taken and those where an appeal is ongoing.

Fraud and Improprieties

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff in (a) his Department and (b) each of its agencies with access to national insurance records were (i) disciplined, (ii) resigned and (iii) dismissed as a result of improprieties concerning their use of this access in 200001.

Malcolm Wicks: The Department treats very seriously any suspicions of unauthorised access by its officers and takes firm action in any cases that arise.
	Information on the number of cases in 200001 where misconduct was identified is in the table.
	
		
			   Number of cases 
		
		
			 Benefits Agency 50 
			 Departmental directorates 1 
			 War Pensions Agency 0 
			 Child Support Agency 2 
			 The Appeals Service 0 
			 Employment Service 7 
			  
			 Total 60 
		
	
	Note:
	DWP was only formed in 200102 and the Employment Service was formerly part of the Department for Education and Employment.
	Information on the outcomes of cases in 200001 is in the following table.
	
		
			   Disciplinary penalty  Dismissed  Resigned  Other 
		
		
			 Benefits Agency 28 12 9 (34)1 
			 Departmental directorates 1 0 0 0 
			 War Pensions Agency 0 0 0 0 
			 Child Support Agency 0 2 0 0 
			 The Appeals Service 0 0 0 0 
			 Employment Service 4 2 1 0 
			 Total 33 16 10 1 
		
	
	(34) No formal action was taken.

Genetic Discrimination

Ian Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if the Government will introduce legislation to prevent genetic discrimination by employers, with specific reference to the refusal of employment on the grounds of adverse genetic test results.

Maria Eagle: We have no plans to introduce such legislation. The Human Genetics Commission is drawing up a report to Health and Science Ministers on the storage, protection and use of personal genetic information. This will include advice on the use of genetic testing in employment. We will carefully consider the commission's advice when it is received.

Benefit Rules

Andrew Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what action he plans to take to simplify the benefit rules for people in residential care.

Maria Eagle: From 8 April 2002 all new customers (and all former preserved rights customers) in independent residential care, nursing homes and local authorities accommodation are entitled to the standard income support, personal allowance. Customers already in receipt of the residential allowance or part III accommodation rate on 8 April 2002 continue to receive it for as long as they satisfy the conditions for entitlement.
	From October 2003 we intend to simplify the rules governing those customers in residential care by removing the residential allowance and part III accommodation rate for all customers. Introducing the same rules for people in care as for those supported in their own homes will simplify the system, making it more transparent and easier for customers to understand.
	A consultation document setting out our proposals in detail is published today and a copy has been placed in the Library.

Press and Public Relations

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people were employed in a press or public relations function in his Department on 1 January in (a) 1997, (b) 1998, (c) 1999, (d) 2000, (e) 2001 and (f) 2002.

Nick Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) on 4 February 2002, Official Report, column 760W.

Press and Public Relations

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost of running the Department's press office was in (a) 199697 and (b) the latest year for which figures are available.

Nick Brown: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The Department for Work and Pensions was formed in May 2001. This involved the amalgamation of parts of Department for Education and Employment (including the Employment Service) with the Department for Social Security.
	The annual running cost for the press office from May 2001 to the end of April 2002 was 1.211 million. This figure includes both salaries and running costs for all press office activity.

Entertainment Costs

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list for each of the last five years the total amount of money spent by Ministers in his Department on food, alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks for official entertainment purposes.

Ian McCartney: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The Department's accounting systems do not separately identify entertainment costs incurred by Ministers. The information could not be provided without incurring disproportionate costs.

Incapacity Benefits

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his written answers of 6 March 2002, Official Report, column 411W, and 2 May 2002, Official Report, column 983W, for what reason a revised version of the system used to allocate individuals to local areas was used; and what criteria he has used to calculate the number of claimants of incapacity benefits.

Nick Brown: The number of people claiming incapacity benefit is taken from a quarterly 5 per cent. scan of the benefit computer system. The process of calculating the number of incapacity benefit claimants was not altered for August 2001.
	Individuals are assigned to local authorities and other areas by matching postcodes against the relevant Office for National Statistics (ONS) postcode directory. The ONS postcode directory used in the original allocation of August 2001 incapacity benefit data was later revised by ONS using an improved methodology. Numbers of incapacity benefit recipients by local authority were consequently recalculated and revised.

Law Enforcement Agencies

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what law enforcement agencies and prosecuting authorities designated with legislation there are within the responsibility of his Department; and what complaints procedure is available for each.

Ian McCartney: holding answer 16 May 2002
	There are no law enforcement agencies nor prosecuting authorities designated with legislation within the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Winter Fuel Payments

Oona King: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what time limit for claims for winter fuel payments will be imposed for winter 2002; and if it will be possible to accept claims now from pensioners who would have qualified for payments in winter 2000 and 2001 who did not submit claims in time.

Ian McCartney: The majority of eligible people will again receive their winter fuel payments automatically for winter 20023. Those people who need to claim for winter 200203 will have until 30 March 2003 to do so. Claims from people who did not claim within the time limits for winters 200001 and 200102 cannot now be paid for those winters. However, failure to submit a claim for one winter does not preclude a person from claiming for the next winter, subject to the time limits. Claim forms for winter 200203 will be available later this year.

Pensions

Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of pensions are underfunded on an MFR basis in the (a) public and (b) private sector; and if he will make a statement on trends in each sector.

Ian McCartney: Private sector defined benefit pension schemes are generally subject to the Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR). Many public sector pension schemes are either unfunded (such as the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme) or covered by alternative legislation (such as the Local Government Pension Scheme) and are therefore not subject to the MFR. There are, however, a number of funded public sector schemes to which the MFR applies, such as those covering employees of some non-departmental public bodies.
	Information on the MFR funding levels of private sector defined benefit schemes is available from the Employers' Pension Provision (EPP) Survey. Information is not available for public sector pension schemes which are subject to the MFR.
	The latest EPP survey, carried out in 2000, indicated that around one in eight (13 per cent.) private sector defined benefit schemes were less than 100 per cent. funded on the MFR basis. Six per cent. of schemes were funded at less than 90 per cent. and 7 per cent. were funded at least at 90 per cent. but at less than 100 per cent. Almost all schemes surveyed that were underfunded had taken action to rectify this situation. These actions included increasing the employers' contributions (78 per cent.), increasing the members' contributions (29 per cent.) and making a cash injection to the fund (19 per cent).
	It is not possible at present to identify funding trends from the data available, because only one full cycle of triennial scheme valuations has been carried out since the MFR was introduced in 1997. However, in February 2002, for the purposes of the regulatory impact assessment which accompanied the regulations recently introduced to make interim changes to the MFR, around one in six private sector defined benefit pension schemes were estimated to be underfunded on the MFR basis. This estimate was based on information collected by the actuarial profession from consulting actuaries and insurance companies between 1997 and 2000, and has been adjusted by the Government Actuary's Department broadly to take account of the likely effects on scheme funding levels of subsequent changes in conditions.

Foster Carers

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  if home responsibilities protection will be given to foster carers;
	(2)  what pension arrangement foster carers are entitled to; and if he will make a statement on support for those who give up work to care for foster children.

Ian McCartney: Home responsibilities protection in respect of carers of children is awarded through child benefit entitlement. Foster parents do not receive child benefit directly unless they have a child of their own aged under 16. We are currently reviewing these arrangements to ascertain if the position of foster carers can be improved.

Housing Benefit

Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the impact of housing benefit regulation 5 on the receipt of housing benefit for a period of notice required by a landlord of a hospitalised claimant who is too unwell to return to their normal dwelling; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  if housing benefit regulation 5 requires the benefits service of a local authority to treat a hospitalised claimant as no longer occupying their normal home and ineligible for benefit if the local social services believe that the claimant is not well enough to return to their normal dwelling.

Malcolm Wicks: The housing benefit scheme is designed to help people on low incomes meet the costs of the accommodation which they rent and occupy as their normal home. We recognise that there are circumstances in which people will reasonably be absent from their normal home for temporary periods and it is right that benefit should remain in payment in these cases.
	People in hospital can continue to receive housing benefit in respect of their normal home for up to 52 weeks, or until the local authority decides that their absence is likely to be substantially more than 52 weeks or become permanent. At this point housing benefit is withdrawn. In reaching a decision on the likely length of a person's absence from their normal home, the local authority takes account of all available evidence including, where appropriate, the views of the local social services.

Child Support

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he will initiate the new CSA maintenance formula; and whether sums being calculated during the interim period from April represent (a) definitive and (b) provisional obligations on absent parents being assessed.

Malcolm Wicks: Regarding the introduction of the new scheme, I refer the hon. Member to the statement my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made to this House on 20 March 2002, Official Report, columns 31516. In all cases where a non-resident parent's liability begins before the new scheme is introduced, the assessment will be made using existing rules, until the case is converted to the new arrangements.

Public Sector Pension Schemes

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what information he collates as to the adequacy of (a) funded provision and (b) direct funding for public sector pension schemes to discharge their present and future obligations.

Ian McCartney: The Department does not collate information on the adequacy of public sector pension schemes to discharge present and future liabilities.
	In the case of funded public sector schemes, this would be taken into account in discussions with the sponsoring Department.
	In the case of unfunded public sector schemes, projections of future expenditure are taken into account as part of the long-term fiscal projections of Her Majesty's Treasury. These are published as part of the Economic and Fiscal Strategy report at the time of the Budget. A copy of the 2002 report is in the Library and shows that the public finances are sustainable in the long term.

HEALTH

Vaccines

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on charging students for a hepatitis B vaccination when it is a condition of university entry.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 19 March 2002
	Under the national health service general practitioners (GPs) are required to provide free of charge for their patients all necessary and appropriate medical services of the type usually provided by GPs. This may include immunisation against hepatitis B, if in the GP's clinical opinion, such a procedure is medically necessary. In determining medical necessity GPs may make reference to Immunisation against Infectious Diseasesthe Green Book. This lists one of the risk groups to whom hepatitis B should be offered as, health care workers including students and trainees who have direct contact with patients' blood or blood stained body fluids or with patients' tissues.
	If a GP thinks it is not medically necessary, then a charge can be made even if the vaccination is a requirement of employment or of university entry.

Vaccines

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the level of BCG and Tuberculin PPD vaccination stocks was on 31 March in each of the past five years.

Yvette Cooper: The stock levels of licensed BCG vaccination and Tuberculin PPD on 31 March each year are shown in the table.
	
		
			 Year BCG vaccine (number of doses) Tuberculin PPD (number of tests) 
		
		
			 2002 2,364,650 530,575 
			 2001 2,217,200 711,875 
			 2000 1,195,650 1,117,275 
			 1999 110,100 131,575 
			 1998 5,093,750 412,375

Vaccines

Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what dates (a) tenders were sought and (b) contracts were awarded for supply of (i) BCG vaccines, (ii) Tuberculin PPD solutions and (iii) influenza vaccine in the last 12 months.

Yvette Cooper: No tenders were sought and no contracts awarded in the last 12 months for BCG vaccine or Tuberculin PPD solutions.
	For influenza vaccine, tenders were sought on 13 June 2001 and awards were made to four suppliers on 1 July 2001. The contract award notice appeared in the Official Journal of the European Communities (OJEC) on 7 August 2001.

Parliamentary Questions

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the written questions asked of him between (a) 1 to 30 June 2001, (b) 1 to 31 July 2001, (c) 1 to 30 September 2001, (d) 1 to 31 October 2001, (e) 1 to 30 November 2001, (f) 1 to 31 December 2001, (g) 1 to 31 January 2002, (h) 1 to 28 February 2002, (i) 1 to 31 March 2002 and (j) 1 to 30 April 2002 that had not received a substantive answer by 30 April; and if he will state (i) the name of the hon. Member asking the question and (ii) the reasons the question had not received a substantive answer.

Hazel Blears: holding answer 2 May 2002
	I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Council (Mr. Cook) on 2 May 2002, Official Report, columns 94950W.
	The information is shown in the table.
	
		
			  February March April 
		
		
			 Number of written questions yet to receive a substantive answer by 30 April 5 70 391 
			 of which:
			 Number subsequently answered 4 46 329 
		
	
	The number of written questions tabled for the Department was 923 in February, 821 in March, and 1,139 in April. The size of the backlog is unfortunate, but nonetheless the key figurethe amount answereddemonstrates our commitment to responding as promptly and helpfully to Members' questions as we possibly can, regardless of the volume.

Parliamentary Questions

Angela Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will reply to the question from the hon. Member for Tiverton and Honiton, ref. 51604, tabled on 17 April.

Yvette Cooper: I replied to the hon. Member on 20 May 2002.

Smoking

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent information he has collated on the extent to which smoking reduces life expectancy.

Yvette Cooper: The Health Education Authority publication titled The UK Smoking Epidemic: Deaths in 1995 by Christine Callum sets out the impact of smoking on life expectancy, table F1 on page 65. A copy of the report is available in the Library.
	The report shows, for example, that men of 35 who smoke will, on average, die seven years earlier than men who have never been smokers. Similarly, women of 35 who smoke will, on average, die six years earlier than women who have never been smokers.

Genetic Discrimination

Ian Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the Government will introduce legislation to prevent genetic discrimination by insurers, with specific reference to the refusal of insurance on the grounds of adverse genetic test results.

Yvette Cooper: The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report on genetics and insurance published in April 2001 recommended that the best way forward would be for Government and industry to agree a voluntary moratorium on the use of genetic tests by insurers. The moratorium came into effect on 1 November 2001 and will last for five years. Details of the moratorium are set out in the Government's response to the select Committee published in October 2001. However, if there is evidence of serious and persistent non-compliance with the terms of the moratorium, then the Government are prepared to introduce legislation if necessary.

London

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what recent assessment he has made of the number of people living in London who do not feature in the official statistics on which funding for the NHS in London is based;
	(2)  what recent assessment he has made of the impact of the change in the population in London over the last 10 years on demands for the NHS in London.

John Hutton: The allocation of resources to health authorities and primary care trusts is informed by weighted capitation targets which take account of the health need of local populations.
	The populations used to calculate weighted capitation targets are based on Office for National Statistics population projections. These are updated to take account of trends in births, deaths, internal migration and international migration. The population projections used are the latest available at the time of allocations.
	The Department has not made any separate assessment of the number of people living in London who do not feature in these official statistics.

Homeless People

Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information is collected on the (a) number and (b) proportion of homeless people committing suicide who are (a) rough sleepers and (b) living in temporary accommodation; and if he will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: This information is not routinely collected. However, the Department funds the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness. In March 2001, the National Confidential Inquiry team published its five-year report, Safety First, building on the earlier report Safer Services. It was based on a detailed study of 5,582 suicides and 186 homicides by psychiatric patients in the United Kingdom between 1996 and 2000. It found that there were 131 suicides among homeless people, 3 per cent. of the inquiry sample.
	The Department is in the process of developing, under the direction of the National Director for Mental Health, Professor Louis Appleby, a coherent national suicide prevention strategy to ensure that we are doing all we can to prevent suicides. This strategy was launched for public consultation on 26 April 2002. Copies of the strategy are available in the Library.

Asthma

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on the Government's plans to develop a comprehensive service within the NHS to (a) research the causes and (b) treat the condition of asthma;
	(2)  what proposals his Department has for extending the provision of rehabilitation facilities in general hospitals and medical centres for asthma sufferers.

Jacqui Smith: Management of asthma mainly takes place in primary care. The chronic disease management programme (CDMP), introduced in July 1993, provides arrangements for health promotion under the GMS national contract for GPs. Participating GPs (93 per cent.) receive a fixed annual payment for running organised programmes of care for patients with asthma (and for those with diabetes).
	People with asthma will benefit from the emerging Expert Patients Programme which willvia the national health serviceprovide training in self-management skills for people with long term chronic conditions. The first pilot phase has recently begun in selected primary care trust sites, with activity to take place both on a generic and a disease-specific basis.
	The Medical Research Council always welcomes high quality applications from the scientific community for support into any aspect of biomedical research and these are judged in open competition with other demands on funding. The Department of Health spend on directly commissioned research projects on asthma since 1997 is an estimated 7.24 million.

Doctors

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average number of doctors is per 100 beds in NHS hospitals in (a) West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust, (b) Norfolk and Norwich Health Care NHS Trust, (c) James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust, (d) Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust and (e) Addenbrooke's NHS Trust.

Yvette Cooper: The information requested is given in the following table.
	
		Number of hospital medical staff within specified trusts -- (as at 30 September)
		
			  2000(35) Staff per 100 beds(36),(37) 
		
		
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust 200 29.4 
			 Norfolk and Norwich Health Care NHS Trust 440 48.4 
			 James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust 200 38.0 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust 290 37.3 
			 Addenbrooke's NHS Trust 720 57.0 
		
	
	(35) Data are rounded to the nearest ten.
	(36) Staff per 100 beds were calculated using unrounded figures.
	(37) Staff per 100 beds were calculated using average total daily number of available beds which includes beds in the following wards, Acute, Geriatric, Mental Illness, Patients with Learning Disabilities, and Maternity. The returns are made on a financial year basis and the latest year for which data are available is 200001. Figures are taken from the annual Korner return KH03Bed availability and occupancy.
	Source:
	Department of Health 2000 medical and dental workforce census

Immunisation (Portsmouth)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been spent on respiratory syncytial virus infection immunisation in the last three years in Portsmouth primary care trust; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: There is no licensed immunisation available for respiratory syncytial virus. Palivizumab, a monoconal antibody, is prescribed through hospital consultants to assist with the condition. Information on the cost to Portsmouth primary care trust of this treatment is not collected centrally.

Hospital Discharges

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the proposed charges will be to social services departments to cover the costs of beds needlessly blocked through delayed discharges, as set out in paragraph 8.10 of 'Delivering the NHS Plan';
	(2)  what the proposed incentive charges will be to NHS trusts to cover the costs of emergency readmissions to ensure patients are not discharged prematurely as set out in paragraph 8.10 of 'Delivering the NHS Plan';
	(3)  if he will place in the Library the evidence that he has collated that NHS hospitals are discharging patients prematurely as set out in paragraph 8.10 of 'Delivering the NHS Plan'.

Jacqui Smith: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May) on 15 May 2002, Official Report, columns 73435W.
	On the issue of premature discharge from hospital, information on emergency readmissions is available in 'NHS Performance Indicators: Acute NHS Hospital Trusts' (ref 26829) and 'NHS Performance Indicators: Health Authorities' (ref 26830) which are available in the Library.

Hospital Treatment

John Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many out-patient referrals from general practitioners were made within the Barking and Havering health authority area in (a) each year from 1994 to date and (b) each month of the last year.

John Hutton: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Number of GP written referral requests for first out-patient appointments: Barking, Havering and Redbridge health authority
		
			 Year/quarter GP written referral requests 
		
		
			 199798  
			 2 15,628 
			 3 16,283 
			 4 15,140 
			   
			 199899  
			 1 16,847 
			 2 17,217 
			 3 17,290 
			 4 17,430 
			   
			 19992000  
			 1 18,165 
			 2 15,540 
			 3 14,279 
			 4 17,881 
			   
			 200001  
			 1 20,268 
			 2 17,595 
			 3 16,982 
			 4 17,780 
			   
			 200102  
			 1 18,255 
			 2 17,337 
			 3 17,185 
		
	
	Source:
	Department of Health form QM08R

Hospital Treatment

John Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many elective patients received in-patient treatment within the Barking and Havering health authority area in (a) each year from 1994 to date and (b) each of the past 12 months.

John Hutton: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Elective admissions by monthNHS hospitals in Barking, Havering and Redbridge health authority 199697 to 200001
		
			 Admission date 199697 199798 199899 19992000 200001 
		
		
			 April 2,627 2,783 2,307 2,405 2,310 
			 May 2,579 2,376 2,178 2,315 2,770 
			 June 2,511 2,342 2,513 2,752 2,726 
			 July 2,780 2,792 2,870 2,584 2,832 
			 August 2,125 1,977 2,551 2,510 2,893 
			 September 2,592 2,713 2,857 2,530 2,583 
			 October 3,013 2,943 2,878 2,597 2,779 
			 November 2,723 2,684 2,957 2,818 2,667 
			 December 1,938 2,252 2,258 2,022 1,886 
			 January 2,076 1,932 2,302 2,126 2,280 
			 February 2,466 2,159 2,818 2,579 2,300 
			 March 2,380 2,368 3,048 2,752 2,500 
			  
			 Total 29,810 29,321 31,537 29,990 30,526 
		
	
	Source:
	Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health

Dementia (Closure of Facilities)

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his policy is on the closure of long-stay beds for dementia patients.

Jacqui Smith: The national service framework for older people, published in March 2001, sets out the Government's strategy to ensure fair, high quality integrated health and social care services for older people. This covers services for people with dementia. An adequate supply of long-term care beds needs to be available for those people with dementia for whom this is the appropriate form of care.

Dementia (Closure of Facilities)

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on (a) the NHS long-stay provision for severely demented patients in North Hertfordshire and (b) the closure of beds at Elizabeth Court and Victoria Court;
	(2)  what his assessment is of the effect on delayed discharges at the Lister Hospital Stevenage of the closure of NHS long-stay beds for patients with dementia at Elizabeth Court and Victoria Court.

Yvette Cooper: Hertfordshire County Council are in discussion with local primary care trusts and Bedfordshire and Luton Community National Health Service Trust on their proposals for the long term care of patients suffering with dementia.

Alzheimer's Disease (Memory Test)

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the effect on demand for NHS long-stay provision in respect of Alzheimer's disease if the Cantab Paired Associates memory test for Alzheimer's disease were more widely used;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the Cantab Paired Associates memory test for Alzheimer's disease; and if he will make a statement as to what guidance his Department has issued as to the use of this test.

Yvette Cooper: The Department has not assessed the effectiveness or the implications on demand for NHS long-stay provision of the Cantab Paired Associates memory test.
	Consideration is being given to the inclusion of a clinical guideline on the management of dementia within the National Institute for Clinical Excellence's programme of work. Such a guideline would cover diagnosis of dementia, including memory tests.

Alzheimer's Disease (Memory Test)

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the timetable is for the appraisal by NICE of the Cantab Paired Associates memory test for Alzheimer's disease; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: The Cantab Paired Associates memory test for Alzheimer's disease is not currently on the NICE work programme.
	Consideration is being given to the inclusion of a clinical guideline on the management of dementia within the National Institute for Clinical Excellence's programme of work. Such a guideline would cover diagnosis of dementia, including memory tests.

Committee Mandates

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the mandate of the committee of senior officials on public health is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: The committee of senior officials on public health (CSOPH) was established in 1975 by European Council Decision 75/365/EEC, as a result of the adoption of the directives relating to medical training. Its mandate is set down in Article 2, which states that the task of the Committee shall be:
	to identify and analyse any difficulties which might arise from the implementation of Directives 75/362/EEC and 75/363/EEC (now Directive 93/16/EC);
	to collect all relevant information on the conditions under which general and specialist medical care is given by doctors in the Member States;
	to deliver opinions which could guide the Commission's work with a view to amendment of the above mentioned Directives.
	CSOPH's remit was extended by later Decisions to take in the same tasks for:
	Nurses responsible for general care;
	Midwives; and
	Dentists.
	The Committee is made up of senior officials with responsibility for national health care systems. Each member state is entitled to nominate one representative and one alternate. The UK representative and his alternate represent the Department of Health.
	CSOPH meets twice each year, in July and December. Meetings last one day. Costs to public funds are minimal. The Commission pays the travel costs of the nominated representative but member states meet the costs if it is necessary for the alternate to attend as well.
	In carrying out its duties, CSOPH is advised by a group of training advisory committees (TACs) made up of representatives from the relevant professional bodies.
	Items on CSOPH's agenda vary, but typically include:
	Problems relating to particular groups or individuals affected by the directives;
	Information on events of major importance that have occurred in each member state affecting the application of the directives;
	Medical demography; and
	Discussions about necessary updates to the directives (for instance CSOPH is empowered to make certain decisions relating to training for medical specialisms).
	Member States are currently considering Commission proposals for streamlining the directives and processes relating to free movement of professionals. The issues arising from the Commission's proposals for the future of professional recognition were submitted to the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committees (Explanatory Memorandum No. 7239/92COM(2002)119final) in April 2002.

CAT Scanners

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many CAT scanners there are in London.

Yvette Cooper: There are currently approximately 60 Computed Tomography (CT) scanners installed in the national health service in the London region.
	Under a central modernisation programme, funding has been made available to ensure that no CT scanner used in the diagnosis of cancer will be more than 10 years old by 2004. This programme will allow the replacement of 19 CT scanners in London, of which 14 have already been delivered.

Nursing Homes and Care Homes

Crispin Blunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proposals he has to help residents of care and nursing homes who pay their own fees from civil service pensions cope with the increases to their fees above inflation.

Jacqui Smith: If self-funding residents of care homes have insufficient income to pay their own fees they may approach their local authority for advice and possible financial assistance. In considering whether or not to provide financial support, and the extent of that support, local authorities should refer to the National Assistance (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1992.

Nursing Homes and Care Homes

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the effect of the changes of national insurance contribution on the care home sector; and what estimates he has made of the increased costs to care homes following the increase in national insurance contributions by (a) employers and (b) employees.

Jacqui Smith: It is estimated that the changes to employers and employees' national insurance contributions announced in the Budget will increase pay costs on average by 0.7 per cent. next year.

Nursing Homes and Care Homes

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the success of the long-term relationship between social services and the independent care home sector following the launch of the (a) concordat, (b) building capacity, (c) joint funding and (d) change agent arrangement initiatives; and if he will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: Our long-term care policy has led to more constructive partnerships between social services and the independent health and social care sectors. This is already bringing about better outcomes for patients and service users by delivering speedier and more flexible services to individuals, positively using the plurality of providers within our system. This is true for short-term services such as intermediate care as well as residential and nursing care. We are supporting these changes in many ways, including a substantial increase in the funding for personal social services and additional money and assistance through the change agents team-working with individual councils.

Nursing Homes and Care Homes

Nick Hawkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on (a) local authorities and (b) other care home owners imposing charges on residents for services which were intended to be free of charge under the Health and Social Care Act 2001.

Jacqui Smith: From 1 October 2001, the national health service has taken on responsibility for the funding of care from a registered nurse for all care home residents who, prior to that, paid for all or part of that care.
	From 1 April 2003, the NHS, rather than local authorities, will become responsible for funding the care from a registered nurse for residents who are currently supported by local authorities.

Professions Allied to Medicine

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of the health budget in each NHS trust area in England is spent on professions allied to medicine broken down by each discipline.

John Hutton: The information requested is not available centrally.

Mid Essex Hospital Trust

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in the Mid Essex hospital trust area were awaiting in-patient treatment in the last two available months; and how many were waiting (a) over 12 months and (b) over 15 months for treatment.

Yvette Cooper: At Mid Essex Hospital Services National Health Service Trust there were 9,732 patients waiting for elective admission at 31 March 2002, of these 320 were waiting more than 12 months and none were waiting more than 15 months. At the end of February there were 9,646 patients waiting for elective admission, of these 286 were waiting more than 12 months and five were waiting more than 15 months.

Mid Essex Hospital Trust

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in the Mid Essex hospital trust area are waiting for an out-patient appointment; how many have been waiting more than (a) 13 weeks and (b) 26 weeks in the latest available quarter.

Yvette Cooper: As at 31 March 2002 at Mid Essex Hospital Services National Health Service Trust 794 patients were waiting more than 13 weeks for first consultant out-patient appointment following a general practitioner written referral, and no patients were waiting more than 26 weeks.

Hepatitis C

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on (a) the steps which he is taking to ensure that hepatitis C is diagnosed and treated and (b) the budget for health awareness promotion concerning hepatitis C.

Yvette Cooper: We plan to publish a consultation document on a strategy for hepatitis C during the summer, which will propose how prevention, testing and treatment services might be strengthened.
	In October 2000, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) issued guidance to the national health service on the use of Ribavirin and Interferon Alpha in the treatment of hepatitis C. Since then, we have placed health authorities and primary care trusts under a statutory obligation set out in directions, which came into force on 1 January 2002, to provide appropriate funding for treatments recommended by NICE.
	Work on the strategy has identified the need to raise professional and public awareness of hepatitis C. The Department recently held four regional hepatitis C seminars for primary care professionals and sent a hepatitis C briefing pack to all general practitioners and practice nurses in England. The pack includes information leaflets for patients. We will be assessing the need for further health promotion activities to raise professional and public awareness.
	Implementation of the strategy will form a key component of the hepatitis action plan proposed in the chief medical officer's infectious diseases strategy, Getting Ahead of the Curve.

Child Mental Health Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the date was of the last meeting held between Ministers in his Department and Ministers in the Department for Education and Skills at which child mental health services were discussed.

Jacqui Smith: I met with my noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Education and Skills (Baroness Ashton of Upholland) on 6 February 2002 to discuss a wide range of subjects, one of which was child and adolescent mental health.

Chiropody and Podiatry Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance his Department has issued about the circumstances in which patients should receive NHS chiropody services.

Jacqui Smith: The Department has not issued any guidance on access specifically to national health service chiropody services. However, chiropody/podiatry services are essential parts of the national service frameworks for older people and diabetes.

Chiropody and Podiatry Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has for the NHS to develop a partnership with private sector state registered chiropodists.

Jacqui Smith: We have no specific plans to develop a partnership with the private sector state registered chiropodists. However, the NHS Plan document Delivering the NHS Plan states that primary care trusts will be free to purchase care from public, private or voluntary providers as appropriate.

Chiropody and Podiatry Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list (a) the initial contacts and (b) the first contacts in respect of chiropody by region in each year since 1997.

Jacqui Smith: Information about initial contacts and first contacts by region with the chiropody service are contained in the statistical report Chiropody Services, Summary Information for 200001, England. A copy of the report is in the Library and it is also available on the Department's website www.doh.gov.uk/public/kt230001.

Chiropody and Podiatry Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement about (a) the reasons for substantial regional variations in the episodes of care in chiropody and (b) what steps he is taking in respect of such variations.

Jacqui Smith: We acknowledge that there are regional variations in national health service chiropody/podiatry services. These variations may result from NHS organisations prioritising the services they provide to meet local demand for chiropody/podiatry services. The criteria used to clinically prioritise will be determined locally.
	We are committed to recruiting more allied health professionals (AHPs) which include chiropodists/ podiatrists through the NHS Plan targets and will build on the over 6,500 extra AHPs as announced in the 2002 Budget.

Chiropody and Podiatry Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the trend in foot health of persons aged over 75 years.

Jacqui Smith: The national service framework for older people sets a performance measure to collect numbers/rates of people aged 75+ who access chiropody/ podiatry services. Information from that may be used to inform future planning of services.

Mental Health Services

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the use of (a) art and (b) counselling in the care and treatment of those with mental health problems.

Jacqui Smith: The Department has made no assessment of the use of art therapy and counselling either alone or in comparison with other treatments or services. However, creative arts therapy is increasingly recognised as a valuable treatment for people with a range of problems, including mental health problems. It offers an opportunity for expression and communication and can be particularly helpful to those individuals who find it hard to express their feelings verbally. The art therapist may work as part of a team in both primary and specialised health and social care settings. Equally, counselling, like psychotherapy, is offered within the national health service by a large number of both medical and non-medical staff in primary and specialised care settings and has been shown in a number of independent trials to make an important contribution to the treatment of common mental disorders.

Mental Health Services

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the expenditure was in (a) Manchester, (b) Salford and (c) Trafford on mental health services in each of the past five years.

Jacqui Smith: The expenditure on mental health services in the Manchester, Salford and Trafford areas over the past five years is shown in the table.
	
		000 
		
			  Manchester health authority area Salford and Trafford health authority area 
		
		
			 199697 37,596 27,653 
			 199798 36,853 26,570 
			 199899 39,867 27,580 
			 19992000 43,425 33,093 
			 200001 44,949 35,623 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Salford and Trafford was formerly one health authority and data cannot be subdivided.
	2. Data relates to expenditure in the two health authority areas (Manchester, Salford and Trafford) on the purchase of secondary health caremental illness for the five years from 199697 to 200001, which is the latest year for which information is available.
	3. The 200001 figures include expenditure by primary care trusts within the relevant health authority area, to enable comparison.
	Sources:
	Annual accounts of the Manchester, and Salford and Trafford, health authorities 199697 to 199899
	Summarisation forms of the Manchester, and Salford and Trafford, health authorities 19992000 and 200001
	Summarisation schedules of the primary care trusts within the Manchester, and Salford and Trafford, health authority areas 200001

Defibrillators

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many new automated defibrillators will be installed in public places in the current financial year.

Yvette Cooper: By 31 March 2002 the Defibrillators in Public Places Programme had seen 487 Automated External Defibrillator devices installed at a total of 64 sites across England, including airports, mainline railway stations, bus and coach stations, and large shopping complexes.
	The current financial year will see the installation of a further 205 units.

Family Centre Places

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many family centre places are provided by local authorities.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is not collected centrally.

Richard House Children's Hospice

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much central Government funding is being given to the Richard House Children's Hospice.

Yvette Cooper: Information on levels of funding for individual hospices is not collected centrally. Funding for hospices is a matter for arrangement between the hospice concerned, primary care trusts and local authorities. Hospices may also apply to the new opportunities fund which has a specific initiative to support and develop palliative care services for children, for which 48 million has been made available.

Waiting Lists

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were waiting over six months on the in-patient waiting list in each month since January 2001.

John Hutton: The table shows the total number of patients who have been waiting over six months for elective admission.
	
		Patients waiting for elective admission: Position at the end of the month: health authorities, England -- Thousand
		
			  Month ending Patients waiting longer than six months 
		
		
			 2001  
			 January 262 
			 February 251 
			 March 243 
			 April 256 
			 May 268 
			 June 264 
			 July 265 
			 August 271 
			 September 274 
			 October 259 
			 November 244 
			 December 256 
			 2002  
			 January 256 
			 February 243 
			 March(38) 238 
		
	
	(38) On 3 May 2002 the Department of Health issued a press release about malpractice in the management of waiting lists at the Royal United Hospitals Bath (reference 20020211). This malpractice is now known to have affected the accuracy of the figures for long waiters reported by the trust for end March 2002.
	We have sampled records for patients that could have been long waiters and have been able to confirm 25 over 15 month waiters. Based on this we estimate that there would be 180 such cases in total, but allowing for uncertainty the 95 per cent. confidence interval suggests this could be as high as 280.
	Source:
	Department of Health form QF01

Waiting Lists

Ann Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether waiting list data is collected centrally, in England and Wales, for the period between diagnosis and treatment for cancer.

Yvette Cooper: The NHS Cancer Plan sets out new goals to reduce waiting times for cancer patients including a target of a maximum one month wait from diagnosis to treatment for breast cancer by December 2001. Central monitoring of performance against this standard began on 1 January 2002 and figures will be published quarterly, with the first data due in June 2002. The Cancer Plan also sets the target that by 2005 no one should wait longer than one month from diagnosis to first treatment except for a good clinical reason or through patient choice. We are currently putting in place data collection mechanisms to show performance against this target.

Hypothermia

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of hypothermia there were in Tyne and Wear in each year since 1997.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is shown in the table.
	Admissions to national health service hospitals in England for hypothermia patients resident in Newcastle and north Tyneside health authority, Gateshead and south Tyneside health authority and Sunderland health authority.
	
		
			  Number of cases 
		
		
			 199697 10 
			 199798 16 
			 199899 15 
			 19992000 10 
			 200001 19 
		
	
	Note:
	Data in this table are adjusted for both coverage and unknown/invalid clinical data, except for 200002 which are not yet adjusted for shortfalls.
	Source:
	Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health.

Intermediate Care Beds

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many of the additional intermediate care beds are in (a) general and acute hospitals, (b) cottage hospitals, (c) patients' own homes, (d) care homes and (e) bed-and- breakfast accommodation.

Jacqui Smith: A breakdown of the number of additional intermediate care beds by setting is not available centrally. However, the Department is not aware of any intermediate care service being provided in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. Intermediate care services provided in patients' own homes do not count as beds.

Vulnerable Adults

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the answer of 18 April 2002, Official Report, column 117980W, what complex issues in the health care aspects of the protection of vulnerable adults scheme have caused the delay in implementation.

Jacqui Smith: The Care Standards Act 2000, which sets out the legal basis for the protection of vulnerable adults scheme, defines 'vulnerable adult' in terms of the 'services' received. These services are to be prescribed in regulations and it has been important to ensure that as many vulnerable adults as possible are protected within the legal framework of the Care Standards Act.

Colposcopy

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) women and (b) women from the Asian community have used the community-based colposcopy service in Luton.

Yvette Cooper: Figures for uptake of the community- based colposcopy service in Luton are not collected by ethnic group.

Out-of-area Referrals

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many out-of-area referrals were made in the NHS in each of the last five years.

John Hutton: Information on the number of referrals made under the out-of-area treatment arrangements is not available centrally.

Nurses

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what criteria are used to decide which NHS nurses in Mid Essex will receive the new living allowances; and whether auxiliary nurses without an NVQ qualification will receive the allowances.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 15 May 2002
	From 1 April qualified nurses (grades C and above) in Essex are eligible for cost of living supplements of up to 600 per year.

Nurses

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what consultation he has had with nurse managers concerning the return of nurses to the NHS; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: Ministers meet front line staff regularly, including nurse managers to discuss recruitment, retention and return.
	In addition, on 5 February 2002 my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State held a meeting on recruitment, retention and return attended by a number of nurse managers from the national health service.

Nurses

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many qualified health visitors are available to supervise the return of nurses to the NHS; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: This information is not collected centrally.
	Local work force development confederations organise return to practice programmes, in conjunction with higher education institutes and local national health service organisations. This includes the organisation of supervising work placements.
	The Department is working closely with the Community Practitioner and Health Visitor Association to look at ways to extend efforts to bring health visitors back into the NHS.

Nurses

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent consultation he has had with health visitors as to the supervision of nurses returning to the NHS; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: Ministers meet front line staff regularly, including health visitors to discuss recruitment, retention and return.
	At the Community Practitioner and Health Visitor Association (CPHVA) conference in November 2001, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State emphasised the Government's commitment to bring health visitors back to the national health service. The Department is currently working with the CPHVA to take this work forward.
	In addition, on 5 February 2002 my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State held a nursing summit on recruitment, retention and return attended by the director of CPHVA.

Nurses

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many of those nurses who have indicated they wish to return to the NHS he calculates have home commitments that prevent them from attending the necessary out-of-area training sessions; where such courses are available; how long they are; what the cost of the courses was in the last 12 months and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: Information about the home commitments of potential returners is not collected centrally.
	Work force development confederations organise and fund a range of part-time, full-time and distance learning return to practice courses which may vary in length, according to the needs of the returner and the vacancies available.
	Return-to-practice courses are free to the returner, who is entitled to financial support of at least 1,000 while retraining. Further financial assistance is available to cover the costs of books and travel. The returners package also offers child care support where needed.
	In 200102, the Department distributed a total of 11 million to work force development confederations to fund return-to-practice initiatives and refresher training. 4,385 health care professionals returned, of which 3,763 were nurses, midwives and health visitors. An additional 2,030 health care professionals are on their way back in.

Nurses

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses who wish to return to the NHS have so far been offered places; how long on average they have been out of practice; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: This information is not collected centrally.
	Since the first recruitment campaign in 1999, over 10,000 qualified nurses, midwives and health visitors have returned to the national health service.
	71 per cent. of nurses who contacted the NHS in 200102 about returning practised more than five years ago. No further breakdown is collected.

Staff Numbers

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many staff were employed in the Social Care Council at 1 April; and what proportion of those staff have clinical contact with NHS patients.

Jacqui Smith: For the purpose of reply, it is assumed that the Social Care Council referred to is the General Social Care Council (GSCC), established under the Care Standards Act 2000 and with the objective to register, regulate and raise standards in the social care work force in England.
	The GSCC employed 82 staff as of 1 April 2002.
	No GSCC staff have any clinical contact with national health service patients as their task is to regulate the social care work force and not to provide frontline services.

Assisted Conception

Martin Linton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what is (a) age range of patients accepted for treatment on the NHS, (b) age at which female NHS patients begin treatment and (c) waiting times for NHS patients on the lists at assisted conception units in England with NHS lists is the average;
	(2)  when the NICE report on access to fertility treatment will be published;
	(3)  if he will list the assisted conception units in England with NHS lists on which patients are prioritised by (a) age, (b) other factors and (c) date of referral.

Yvette Cooper: The statistical information requested is not available centrally. The Department undertook a baseline survey of infertility provision in the national health service in 1999. A report on this Survey of NHS Infertility Services 199798 has been published and copies are available in the Library.
	We understand that the National Institute for Clinical Excellence expects to deliver its clinical guidelines on infertility by October 2003.

Carers

Edward O'Hara: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if he will amend the Assessment of Resources Regulations 1992 to include a mandatory disregard of property in situations where a carer who is aged under 60 or is not a relative of the person he is caring for remains in the property of that person when that person moves into a care home;
	(2)  if he will use the additional funds announced in the Budget for social care to make mandatory the discretionary disregard for carers who remain in the property of the person they are caring for when that person requires care in a care home.

Jacqui Smith: During the passage of the Health and Social Care Act 2001 through Parliament, Ministers gave a commitment to review the need for a mandatory property disregard in situations where former carers, not already covered under the current Assessment of Resources Regulations 1992, continue to live in properties of individuals permanently admitted to residential care. Ministers emphasised that progress could only be made should resources become available.
	For the time being the Government are aware that many properties of care home residents are disregarded by statute from the financial assessment for residential accommodation because they continue to be the main home of spouses and other family members listed in the regulations. In many instances these individuals will have cared for the residents prior to admission. Additionally many councils use their discretion to disregard the value of residents' property from the financial assessment when it continues to be the home of carers not covered by the regulations.

Adoption

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children were adopted in each year since 1990.

Ruth Kelly: I have been asked to reply.
	The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Registrar General. I have asked him to reply.
	Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Keith Vaz, dated 21 May 2002
	As Registrar General for England and Wales, I have been asked to reply to your recent question on numbers of adoptions since 1990. (57193)
	Figures are given in the table below.
	
		Number of adoptions in England and Wales from 1990 until 2001
		
			 Year Number of adoptions 
		
		
			 1990 6,733 
			 1991 6,912 
			 1992 7,466 
			 1993 6,799 
			 1994 6,165 
			 1995 5,840 
			 1996 5,741 
			 1997 5,212 
			 1998 4,617 
			 1999 4,988 
			 2000 5,036 
			 2001 5,131